Distributed cloud service is a growing phenomenon. It fills several roles, distributing data for use by distributed applications, for data protection, and for other reasons. We have been seeing an increase in the number of distributed applications. Non-distributed applications lack the resiliency that is required to work within a cloud, whereas distributed workloads add a certain amount of resiliency to an application. Depending on how they are architected, the lack or failure of one part of a distributed application won’t bring down the entire application. Use of multiple clouds ensures your eggs are not all in one basket, so to speak. Continue reading Distributed Cloud?
At the GPU Technology Conference, NVIDIA CEO Jen-Hsun Huang and Tesla CEO Elon Musk talked about the security of a car. Musk stated that physical access is still required to hack most vehicles and that critical systems such as brakes and steering are segregated from the control display. This got me thinking about the security of the next generation of Internet of Things (IoT) devices.
In virtual and cloud environments, network traffic often flows into a virtualization, then back out, forwarded to another device, usually security, before it re-enters the virtual environment. I call this a “sadly defined network,” not software-defined. Many of my colleagues claim that this is not true. They say that an SDN keeps east-west traffic within the hypervisor and that north-south would not need to do this. I disagree. This will happen when bad design is implemented in virtual and physical security. “Ah!” some will say, “this is solved by micro-segmentation,” but that is not always true, either. Continue reading SDN: Sadly Defined Network
There is a growing movement to abstract hardware completely away, as we have discussed previously. Docker with SocketPlane and other application virtualization technologies are abstracting hardware away from the developer. Or are they? The hardware is not an issue, that is, until it becomes one. Virtualization may require specific versions of hardware, but these are commonplace components. Advanced security requires other bits of hardware, and those are uncommon; many servers do not ship with some of this necessary hardware. Older hardware may not deliver the chipset features needed to do security well. This doesn’t mean it can’t be done, but the overhead is greater. Hardware is dead to some, but not to others. This dichotomy drives decisions when buying systems for clouds or other virtual environments of any size. The hardware does not matter, until it does!
No, this is not an article about changing jobs or anything like that. This is an article about the changing directions we have been seeing within the community and companies surrounding cloud and virtualization: a change that signals a new round of innovation and a fundamental shift in thinking. Before, we thought of cloud + virtualization as the bees’ knees. We now realize that cloud + virtualization is just the starting point. Virtualization can safely be ignored within the confines of the cloud.
There seems to be a new business model appearing: Split the company. Symantec has done this, and now HP. IBM did it by selling off a great chunk of its server line to Lenovo. Cisco did it by divesting itself of ownership of VCE. What is telling is that there is a growing number of large companies splitting rather noisily, all for the same official purpose: to concentrate on core competencies in whatever areas the split resolves into. But this may be a misrepresentation. At least from the outside, it looks like it will be. Continue reading The Great Split Business Model
Join my Circle on Google+
Plugin by Social Author Bio