Between storage area network (San)-based encryption, Fibre
Channel over Ethernet (FCoE), the acquisition (and subsequent
disappearance) of NeoPath Networks, and battles with Brocade
Communications Systems Inc. over environmental issues, Cisco
Systems Inc. has been making plenty of storage headlines lately. In
this Q&A with SearchStorage.com, the networking behemoth's
senior vice president of the data center, switching and security
technology group, Jayshree Ullal, offered her commentary on each of
those topics.Cisco and Brocade have been going back and forth on
power efficiency. What's Cisco's focus when
it comes to 'green' IT?
Jayshree Ullal: The concern for us is that as we move to
higher speed technologies, like 10 Gigabit Ethernet and 8 Gigabit
Fibre Channel, the power consumption is very important -- just by
virtue of running higher performance and higher speed [equipment],
you draw more power. Particularly, 10 Gigabit Ethernet, if you run
it over copper, the UTP cable we're so used to using in Ethernet
installations is a very nice cable, but in terms of a channel it's
very bad. In order to compensate for all the issues that that
channel has -- specifically error correction capabilities and how
many impairments you have to deal with, all the 'jitter
compensation' at the physical layer -- requires incredible amounts
of energy over distances. So as we move to higher speeds, we've got
to make sure we use techniques to better balance power
capabilities. One of the key technologies is virtualization.
Speaking of virtualization, what are your plans for
NeoPath?
Ullal: File virtualization for us is more of a service
than a product per se, to help customers with NAS migration, etc.
However, long term we're also looking at ways to bring in total
data center virtualization of which file may be another component,
and there are really no specifics on timing on that.
We heard Cisco plans to release the technology for the
Catalyst data center switches, why not in storage? Won't it work in
the MDS also?
Ullal: Cisco uses Catalyst switches, the 6500 [model],
with NeoPath's file virtualization to offer a complete end-to-end
file switching service. So, the two can work together, and we offer
services based on that for data migration of files.
So what is that product called?
Ullal: It's the NeoPath product.
But we thought
NeoPath products have been
discontinued.
Ullal: The NeoPath product has been discontinued, but if
people want a service, we're making a distinction between a service
and a product. We can still offer it -- if somebody wants file
virtualization as a service, we can offer it.
So is that where Cisco sees the place of file virtualization
going forward? As a migration service?
Ullal: That's today. Going forward, we see a more
holistic [approach to] data center virtualization. We've shared
that vision, but no dates for products. But in general, when we
bring in an acquisition, especially if it's a smaller product and a
technology-focused acquisition, generally it takes 18 months to two
years to integrate that technology into a broader vision. We've
come out of the standalone appliance, which is what NeoPath had.
We'll link it into our 6500 blades and eventually we'll build it
into a wholly integrated system. That's not uncommon for what we
did with firewalls or load balancers or wide area application
services, the box, the blade and then the total integration.
Incipient [Inc.]'s block-level storage virtualization
software already runs on an MDS blade, and Cisco could snap them up
very easily, but hasn't. Why is that?
Ullal: Our philosophy on these applications is not to be
the application vendor itself but to enable them across a network
fabric, unless they are a very, very network-centric application.
You will see us develop network-centric applications that are so
intertwined in the network that they belong in the network, whether
it's through partnership, acquisition or developing ourselves. The
model will always be twofold -- a suite that is highly integrated
and embedded into the switch, like VSANs and some of the data at
rest, and data migration options that are inherently part of the
network; and another suite, that through APIs can work with popular
and well-known existing storage applications.
Why keep those two models? Why acquire NeoPath and not
Incipient?
Ullal: It depends on if you're activating the control
path or the data path. If you're activating the data path and
expecting to forward at a gigabit line rate, you have to integrate
deeply into network. If it's running at less than gigabit speeds,
and you're shunting off, if you will, to the application for
occasional use and then back to the switch for connectivity, then
it makes sense to do it through an API. We're pretty thoughtful
about how that's done, and also about how customers are deploying
it.
On another subject, there's been a lot of talk lately about
the Fibre Channel over Ethernet standard. Where's the application
for that technology? Who would benefit from it?
Ullal: If you look at the market today, there's billions
of Fibre Channel and Ethernet nodes installed. I don't think
that'll totally change. But moving forward, at the low end you'll
see iSCSI, at the high end Fibre Channel, and in the mainstream
you'll see enhanced multiprotocol Ethernet. I think it'll be most
attractive for customers who are building a new data center because
it's harder to reform the infrastructure in existing ones where all
the space is taken, all the power's accounted for, and you have to
take out something to put something in. It's a huge constraint.
It's easier to deal with during the construction of a new data
center when you can plan from scratch but still can interoperate
with legacy environments.
Aren't customers trying to build fewer rather than more data
centers? Isn't the trend more toward consolidation?
Ullal: I think it's very segment specific and depends on
how much they've already spent. This is nothing but my opinion
because I haven't done a scientific study on this, but it seems
certain verticals and the midmarket are still looking to grow more.
In larger enterprises the power issue is huge, and that's why
consolidation and virtualization are key issues.
So those large enterprises are looking to stick with Fibre
Channel?
Ullal: Well, if they don't have the opportunity to create
a new data center, they have to look into what already exists and
create enhancements. It may be easier to do in a new data center,
but you can carve out a way to do it in an existing data center if
you rearchitect.
If you already have Ethernet and already have Fibre Channel
and there's a protocol that allows you to combine them, why is it
an either/or situation?
Ullal: It's more about integration. Today's integration
within an iSCSI and Fibre Channel environment is something that
needs to go through very expensive and power-hungry gateways. With
Fibre Channel over Ethernet, the gateway function between Ethernet
and Fibre Channel becomes transparent and the integration easier
than today, but you still have to do that integration either
way.