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."
I think this is excellent. I bet if you'll wait about two months, news will appear that Cisco and IBM are going to deploy Linux instead of a proprietary OS in these systems.
In the routers? That would be interesting. Something tells me not to hold my breath though. Isn't Cisco's whole claim to fame the IOS? What reason would they have to give that up and open-source everything/use Linux?
That I wouldn't like to see it mind you -- I'd just be really shocked if it actually happened.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
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.
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.
...now with two backdoors!
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
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