2010-01-26 10:25 AM
There were 75 great questions answered as part of this exciting event today with Tom Georgens of NetApp, Tony Bates from Cisco, and Paul Maritz from VMware.
The innovative secure multi-tenancy architecture was introduced to the world: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/solutions/Enterprise/Data_Center/Virtualization/securecldg.html
Which questions were your favorite(s)? Which ones weren't answered to your satisfaction? Which ones would you have liked to ask but didn't get a chance?
Speak out - and let's continue the discussion over here!
2010-01-26 01:58 PM
Sadly I didn't make it to the event (surely will review the recording though), so apologies if the question has been answered already.
In this solution MultiStore & vFilers play a huge role, so one thing springs immediately to mind:
What is a likely timeframe for MultiStore to support FC and/or FCoE?
I reviewed briefly the architecture via the provided link (BTW - great, in-depth description) & somehow this 1.0 version gets away with only vFiler0 being connected to FC SAN (& boot LUNs).
But arguably with MultiStore supporting all protocols the separation (& flexibility) could go even deeper...
2010-01-26 10:42 PM
Thanks for the question! We have heard many requests from our customers to ad FC & FCoE support for MultiStore. We have plans to provide that kind of functionality in future releases of Data ONTAP. Please contact your local NetApp NDA specialist to provide you more details.
2010-01-27 01:57 AM
Hi, welcome to the community
I watched the presentation and have had a scan through the supporting documentation, which is very well written. I can think of two issues from the business risk team that have not been address.
I can see many technical solutions to question one but question two would just be the end of the design in the early stages in my environment. However I agree this is likely to be the future direction of the data centre.
2010-01-27 08:26 AM
Forgive me for playing devil's advocate here...
I fully understand the need to offer greater security, performance guarantees, and isolation in a virtual infrastructure especially when there is multi-tenancy and I particularly like what VMware, NetApp, and Cisco have put together. However, are we not just "undoing" many of the efficiencies that virtualization brings by creating, once again, wasteful silos? There are now more and more layers of virtualization occuring which consequently increases the management overhead of the solution. We now have virtual virtualization - virtual dedicated resources or VDR if I can steal the term from a colleague. How far do we go until we're back in the same spot we were in before virtualization came along with too many resources and low utilization? Thoughts?
BTW, I posted a much more positive and supportive perspective on this topic on my blog yesterday. :-)
2010-01-27 10:54 AM
Hopefully this will answer your questions a bit:
1) We have architected the solution for each tenant container to be resilient from other tenant workloads or misconfigurations. We have vMware DRS and UCS classes at the compute layer, QoS, CAR and 10GBe in the network, and FlexShare (QoS for storage). This allows us to provision SLAs for each tenant and maintain them.
2) We are in the late stages of having an independant 3rd party security audit done and posted. Keep your eyes open. If there are any specific certifications you are interested in, drop us an email.
2010-01-28 07:09 AM
Thanks for your response.
Can you be a little bit less vague with us though?
We all are here on forums to hear & discuss latest & greatest, so "contact your local NetApp NDA specialist" sounds somewhat dry if you know what I mean
2010-01-28 08:23 AM
I suspect we both share a passion for this technology, so I feel your pain.
But sharing sensitive info like that in a public forum such as this is both unwise from a competitive perspective as well as against corporate policy. If you want good detail on real futures, it must be in the context of an in-person NDA update.