Slashdot Mirror
Cisco, IBM Announce New Partnership, Network Device
karthik_r085 writes "According to Washington Technology, Integrators considering server blade technology to simplify data center architectures stand to benefit from today's partnering announcement by Cisco Systems Inc. and IBM Corp. The companies introduced a combined solution that integrates Cisco switches and IBM blade servers into one unit to help speed deployment and manage data center costs."
These are exciting times.
Seems like a good solution though I would expect to giver up at least an arm and leg, possible a kidney, to buy the things.
vampirical
The companies introduced a combined solution that integrates Cisco switches and IBM blade servers into one unit.
Cisco, IBM... and Crazy Glue to make the two parts hold together.
In huge server rooms (well, at least in mine :-), you generally have 3 areas: a section of racks for servers, a section of racks for switches/routers/patch panels etc, and a section for electrical panels, inline surge protectors, etc.
So, if I can combine my networking and server areas into one, well hell, I can fit more servers into the same space without shelling out for data center expansion.
It's almost a no-brainer.
bash: rtfm: command not found
It's a matter of the cost of more server/switch/router real estate vs higher cost but consolidating it all into a smaller area.
or has IBM been announcing a lot of deals and partnerships lately?
Is it just a normal activity spike on their part, or could this be a way of saying that it's business as usual to those worried over SCO?
feel free to ignore, it just occurred to me that I don't usually notice IBM announcing things like this that often.
Push the envelope. Watch it bend. -Tool
Hell yeah, all my network administrator homeys be down with this, i just dropped this on the IT crew like "hey YO, get this, ibm and cisco, they be hookin up, for real, like real vertical integration type shit" and the crew was just like, oh snap, we be ready to get our ADMINISTRATE on for that shit. You know what I'm sayin? Anyway, all the CCNAs in the house, I know they feel me. Ping OUT.
If you have a box of blades... especially if you're going for lower-power blades like for a web farm, by adding "content switching" a.k.a. load balancing, with a whole lotta gigabit networking, you can have a highly reliable, very high I/O webfarm "in a box".
Wouldn't it be nice to be able to buy a "system chassis" like one does a standard rack, and be able to plug in industry-standard blades as easily as PC expansion cards?
Not just from a couple vendors, but from any major vendor.
With all the industry standards for memory interfaces, power interfaces, drives, etc. I'd think it would be a lot easier to do than the vendors would like.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
They've been doing this with their blade servers for a while. The only thing new here is that the previous switch-module offerings were made by either D-Link or (if I remember correctly) Nortel.
A lot of people mistakenly seem to think these are blades similar to what go into a Cisco 69xx chassis. They're not. They're a module that goes into the back of the blades that allow you to connect your blade server to the rest of your network. You're not going to find ports for plugging in any other servers.
Maybe IBM can beat some sense into Linksys/Cisco's head regarding observing the terms of the GPL?
...now with two backdoors!
If so, they would probably be kind of wary of partnering with C[r]?isco after this:
l ?tid=126&tid=158&tid=172&tid=99
http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/04/04/08/1920228.shtm
Honey, I shrunk the Cygwin
When they combine a switch and a blade it will be called a switchblade.
like Cisco has ever performed like it should...
and before anyone starts it up, I've helped design, build, and maintain a > 5000 CPU cluster ( admittedly, we only process across 250+ CPUs per job )...
anyways, Cisco switches/routers have always performed below and beyond our worst expectations. And the funny thing is, a certain large vendor that might or might not be mentioned in this above-referenced article always recommends them. And I always tell them to bugger off...Cisco switches are the equivalent of Microsoft OSes - the worst quality, most-prevalent standard that one can find. I'll take a HP or Foundry switch any day, thank you very much.
Oh, yeah, and we don't even want to get into the auto-negotiation issues...
Hmmmm I don`t know, but this reminds me a little bit too much of those TV-Video combos that were quite popular in the mid 90's...
I mean if one of the two fails you can still use the other, but you are stuck with the broken secundary unit being attached, forever and always...
I will work to elevate you, just enough to bring you down
You forgot to say insensitive clods...
The PCIMG have had the 2.16 OPEN standard around for a while and it's supported by a goodly number of manufacturers offering a wide range of cards, not just blades. 2.16 defines a cPCI chassis where cards (blades) use twin ethernet, initally over the backplance, to communicate with each other and the outside world via a pair of switches, one at each end of the rack. mmmm....., redundancy.
I'm not sure how much overlap there is in the target markets, but the concept seems more or less identical to this 'new breakthrough'. The artcicle's/IBM's statement that to date, no standard exists to pull together blades and switches, making the Cisco-IBM solution "a de factor (sic) standard," according to an IBM spokesperson seem like blinkered wishful thinking from their marketing departement.
Reginald Molehusband. Edinburgh, Scotland
So, will this one also have a backdoor password that cannot be removed by the customer under any circumstances?
Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
When did /. become a mouthpiece for IBM's press releases? I don't see anything particularly interesting to geeks in this soundbite other than publicity to IBM.
/. posts.
And no, it's not meant to be a flamebait; it's a valid criticism to maintain the neutrality of
I've evaluated blades in an custom application environment, but there was always a concern with the end customer: what if the mainboard went down, what then?
See, normally, with a cluster of 1U x330 series IBMs, you use up a lot of space, but if the mainboard died, you only lose one node. With the single mainboard for multiple blades and now a switch, what assurances are there for the mainboard not going south taking 15 nodes with it? (Besides dual power supplies, etc.)
thanks!
went down to the colo on friday night
it seems the network was down, I had to set things right
I had a little money to burn and no local friends
So I bought a blade server for each of my LANs
IBM had a plan, said we're gonna get rich
Put the double cross on a doublecrossing SCO bitch
Just a dirty little F-U-D but it's a sure-fire win
Cisco, when we shut them down we're gonna cut you in
Yeah, late and wired as I was, ya know I'd do it all again
Back when I bought a blade server for each of my lans
They were sharp enough to fit up to eighteen to a rack
Hard enough to make them impossible to crack
Faster than the bootup of a windows machine
Shaded blue enough to make the sky look green
This flies in the face of science.
Cisco Goes for an Open-Source Spin
The Internet's nature is peer to peer - 20050301_cs_profs.pdf
I got called a couple of months ago 'cos the new blade environment also included a layer 7 Nortel switch (yes I mean layer 7).
Do this add something in the middle of a replacement for the Nortel unit?
This is NOT excellent. It is a TRUSTED COMPUTING system.
... relegates noncompliant and potentially vulnerable systems to environments with limited or no network access. Noncompliant endpoints can be denied access, placed in quarantine, or given restricted access. The main NAC page explains that NAC only permits connections to "compliant and trusted endpoint devices". Trusted Computing devices running approved software.
If you check IBM's Tivoli whitepaper, the top page states right off the bat that it is an "identity management system". Page 7 states that is is based on "tamper-resistant, non-bypassable trusted computing bases (TCBs)".
If we look at Cisco's BUSINESS READY DATA CENTER Security Overview and head down to the Trust and Identity Management section we see Cisco Network Admission Control (NAC)
Cisco's Business Ready Data Center Initiative press release says:
Cisco is collaborating with industry-leading technology, system integration and support partners including EDS, HP, IBM, Intel and Microsoft, to enable integrated solutions to be offered to joint customers. Collaboration efforts will include sharing of best practices, alignment of architectures
Alignment of architectures - that would be the new Trusted Computing architecture.
And they are working with EDS, HP, IBM, Intel and Microsoft. HP, IBM, Intel and Microsoft were four of the five Trusted Computing Group's founding members. But who the hell is EDS? Why they have been selected To Operate Root Key Certificate Authority for Trusted Computing. That's a press release from Wave Systems, another member of the Trusted Computing Group. Teir EMBASSY system was the Trusted Computing system before it was named Trusted Computing.
The initial Trusted Computing deployment will look like a GoodThing. Its security features will be used for the benefit of companies deploying it, and there is no infrastructure in place yet to abuse the system. But fundamentally Trusted Computing is designed to be secure against the owner. Once a signifigant number of desktop computers include Trust chips that anti-owner "security" is going to turn into a nightmare. If you computer is not "compliant and trusted" and running approved software then these Business Ready Data Centers may deny you access. Websites will start refusing you access. New software will refuse to instal. And in about 4 or 5 years, ISPs may start installing Cisco's Network Admission Control routers. At that point you will be denied internet access unless you have a "compliant and trusted" system. Then Trusted Computing is no longer "optional". You can't switch it off and opt out. Then you no longer own your computer.
Oh, and if anyone doubts that ISPs would ever instal such routers that deny you internet access, may I point you to another slashdot story Cisco Working to Block Viruses at the Router. Even Slashdot missed the story that these are Trusted Computing routers. They are being pitched as a GODD THING. They don't actually block virues. What they do is make sure you have a Trusted Computer, then they can use the Trust system to ensure that you are running (or not running) any software they want to require you to run (or that they forbid you to run). In particular they could check that you operating system has the latest patches and that you are running an approved virus scanner, thus the claim that they fight viruses.
To top it off, Bush's cybersecurity advisor gave a speech at a computer convention where he called
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Sun has had its B1600 blade shelf fitted with a pair of Cisco derived switches since day 1. Seems like IBM is playing a bit of catchup here. We've got one of these shelves sitting in one of our departments racks, and I can confirm that it the switches are definitely cisco running IOS.
Stealing a rhinoceros should not be attempted lightly.
If you have a bunch of servers and a bunch of blade server containers you split the servers. If you have 2 web servers you split them into different containers and racks, and ideally different uplink switches, etc.. You use a load balancer for HA / Failover.
If your customer has 15 servers and no redundancy then you need to see if its even worth it to split servers up. If one of those servers fails and nothing else will work (for that customer) anyway it doesnt matter if everything else is down the the whole chassis dies.
If your in a large environment you should have a spare chassis already racked and cabled to the network. If a chassis dies it will take a few minutes to move everything over.
It seems every time we open a new office or move one, the Windows boxen are up in no time and our WAN people are always switching out WIC cards, flash memory and upgrading IOS's.
I think that in 5 years MS will rule the router and switch market with the X-Router and the DirectSwitch. GUI based OS for easy setup and one scalable hardware platform.
On a street corner in a random city, it happened. Two men, approaching each other, each carrying a large piece of electronic equipment, collide. "Hey, you got your IBM Blade server in my Cisco Switch!" "Hey, you got your Cisco Switch in my IBM Blade Server!" Thus, it was born.
Did Cisco not learn anythign from their MGX series. One thing goes wrong the whole box is down. I'm sorry but it is a bad idea in my book. It makes it much harder to diagnose problems. Cost more to fix. And coems with a whole new assortment of bugs. Talk to anyone who used the MGX8850 and ask them their thoughts on it.
Sun sparc and intel blades plug into a rack mounted unit that contains two gigabit switches
'de facto standard' = wishful thinking. HP will be incorporating Layer 3-7 stuff in their blade enclosure switches while these guys are still trying to ship their first units.
what a load of marketing BS .. didn't realize how much both Cisco and IBM have been struggling for new ideas. Sun's been doing this for over a year now with their blades and specialty blades .. they just don't invest the same $$ in advertising smoke and mirrors
processes monitor YOU!
Seriously, Ugh. Hang on to your "open" PCs, guys. They may be a huge market for "Pre-palladium" hardware here in a couple years..
I think (Hope?) the *first* time Joe Public can't connect to the internet or run an application or because it isn't "approved," it's all over... I mean, look at what happened to the Pentium unique identifier.
- Superliminal
While they don't come out and say it, 5 minutes using it and you can tell it's a Cisco switch or a really (really) good knock-off.
w are/d ocs/pdf/817-2576-10.pdf
Here's the config guide for it:
http://www.sun.com/products-n-solutions/hard
Well, local usergroup had meeting really recently with IBM.
They are already shipping racks with IBM and CISCO equipment in it (or building racks like that)
Note, this is not for your everyday mom and pop shop. expect to be spending >20K for this type of equipment. They are already doing blades in their EServer lines where you can have Intel chips, xeon's , and powerpc processing board. Intresting stuff will be arriving with the next version of powerpc. (I don't know how much I can say) but you are able to run installations of linux and AIX on power pc machines (with multiple processors)
They will be putting some of the more reliability systems into the Power equipment.
Note: with mainframes you are not getting much in the way of speed these days but you are getting more virtualability and high speed io.
I'm buying 500 shares