Decentish take on the evolution of SDN in networking.
So let’s assume that all the vendors converge on a small set of merchant silicon, which invariably leads to lower hardware prices. Even then, the network vendors will simply switch the pricing mix to more accurately reflect what we have known for years: that the software is where it’s at. While the hardware will indeed be cheaper, the overall solution will cost roughly the same. We don’t end up with commoditized network gear; we end up in a world that reflects the actual R&D splits a bit more faithfully.
Yup. Except in places where you can offload a service to x86. So not the forwarding plane like everyone likes to talk about, but the control plane and some of the services will take advantage of x86. So better economics for sure, but not necessarily via cheap switches.
(via Searching for an SDN Definition: What Is Software-Defined Networking? - Network Computing) Required reading.
Cisco’s David Ward gave a talk on “SDN for Service Providers,” which was likely more of a broader shaping up of Cisco’s SDN strategy, and was, not surprisingly, very similar to the presentation he gave last year while he was at Juniper, including the “network weather map” analogies. Points for consistency.
The following conclusion to me is incorrect: Google built internal servers and switches and they are using OpenFlow and therefore the companies that build servers and switches will be under enormous pressure from the network DIY movement and most likely will go out of business.
I think the following conclusion is correct: Google built a network that is adaptable to the compute requirements of their business.