07:53 PM
Connect Directly
Repost This

SDN: From Slideware to Software in 2013?

2013 should be the year SDN transitions from an over-hyped R&D project to an actual product category. At same time, the market will split into several distinct architectural approaches.

In a game of IT buzzword bingo, SDN would be near the top of anyone's list for 2012. But aside from ample quantities of tradeshow talk, most of the action was in the halls of finance, not on the floors of data centers. VMware's acquisition of SDN darling Nicira, for a mind-blowing $1.26 billion, served notice that the concept of a software-controlled network has legs. But if analyst predictions and vendor roadmaps are to be believed, 2013 should mark the point when SDN moves from being a debate topic to a serious technology alternative for network upgrades and redesigns.

For instance, IDC hiked its 2013 sales estimate of SDN by 80%, from $200 million to $360 million, on its way to $3.7 billion by 2016. That's an impressive CAGR of over 117%. While still tiny by comparison with an Ethernet switch market that runs over $5 billion per quarter, it does indicate SDN is moving into the networking mainstream.

Indeed, Ben Cherian, CSO of SDN startup Midokura (more on them later), with perhaps more than a bit of self-interest, predicts SDN buyouts will increase during the next couple years. He believes every major networking company will recognize the need to have an SDN strategy and put the technology pieces of the puzzle in place by acquiring one of the myriad SDN startups. That's already beginning to happen, with Juniper Networks' $176 million acquisition of Contrail Systems, an SDN startup that was snapped up before the company even officially launched. Cisco Systems also bought two SDN-related startups in 2012, Insieme and vCider.

Yet for SDN to hit IDC's aggressive sales targets, the underlying technology must not only mature, but segment. It may start in 2013 with the industry settling on terminology and a few clearly defined use cases that illustrate concrete and measurable benefits of an SDN-based approach over traditional alternatives, the groundwork for what Cherian believes will be significant customer adoptions in 2014. Midokura is staking its fortunes on software-defined network virtualization, but other promising SDN product categories include improving carrier WAN resiliency, as a platform for L2 data center fabrics (à la OpenFlow), and automation of network device management and service deployments (e.g. Cisco onePK).

But SDN segmentation won't just occur along product lines and feature sets. 2013 will also mark the point at which distinct SDN technology and architectural categories emerge. OpenFlow grabbed the early mindshare, on the way to (prematurely, I believe) becoming the eponym for the entire category. But the contrast between OpenFlow and Midokura's MidoNet product illustrates two key SDN dividing lines that will become clearer as the year progresses.

Functionally, L2 packet forwarding and routing engines are distinct from software-defined virtual overlays on traditional Ethernet. Brad Hedlund makes a nice distinction between SDN re-inventing the physical network--that is, SDpN (software defined physical network)--and being a platform for the virtual network layer--that is, SDvN (software defined virtual network).

At the physical layer, a software-defined network based on a centralized controller that uses OpenFlow can serve as an alternative to standards like TRILL, SPB and MLAG, or proprietary protocols like Juniper QFabric, Brocade VCS or Gnodal Fabric to implement fast, flat, multipathing L2 networks. That's not the only benefit, of course, because applications can be created to take advantage of the programmatic interface in an OpenFlow controller (see Big Switch Networks), but it is a distinct approach to SDN.

Alternatively, and the path Midokura has chosen, is to ride SDN intelligence on top of existing data center networks, however they are implemented, to build virtualized L3 and L4 services. According to Cherian, not only does MidoNet extend traditional L2 vSwitch features like distributed switching and traffic isolation to L3, but it adds L4 services like ACLs/firewall, NAT, load balancing and virtual port and device monitoring. Essentially, MidoNet transforms a physical network of edge routers, fabric switches and virtualized servers into multiple logical (i.e., virtual) networks with separate virtual service provider routers (in public clouds) and tenant environments, each with its own virtual router, switches and host ports.

Next page: Getting Into the Differences View Full Bio

1 of 2
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
User Rank: Apprentice
1/30/2013 | 8:22:43 PM
re: SDN: From Slideware to Software in 2013?
Kurt, I was particularly interested in your comments on the need for a solid definition of the SDN market with a segmentation that helps consumers understand the various pieces of G«ˇthe SDN marketG«÷ and how they fit together. In this early stage of the market, consumers are confused as to what is included in SDN. In effect, they want to know how big a move to SDN technology represents; i.e. once they start down the path what are all the pieces that they will need to invest in and how far down the path do they have to go before they start to realize the benefits.

Frequently, we look to the industry analysts to create a workable market topology. Currently, there are almost as many market segment models as there are analysts. Several are using a product model that includes switches and routers, controllers, virtualization solutions and applications. Another uses the OSI layer model, categorizing SDN products by which layer(s) they impact. Early efforts focused on the separation of the control and data plane in Layer 2 and Layer 3 devices, but as you mention, much of the focus now is on Layer 4 G«Ű 7 network services.

Some analysts are using an industry segmentation with telecommunications providers, cloud service providers and enterprise data centers as the major segments. Financial analysts tend to organize along vendor lines, using IT Vendors (IBM, HP, Dell), traditional Network Vendors (Cisco, Juniper) and startups as categories.

We agree with your comment that a market model that is based on SDN technologies and architectural categories will emerge. We believe that this is an essential step in the market moving G«ˇfrom slideware to reality.G«÷ These are the preferred types of market definitions because they also help consumers understand the pieces, how they fit together and where each vendor is focused. Using this type of model, consumers get insight into not only what the new pieces are, but also how existing pieces, such as the packet processing infrastructure that you mention, must be upgraded to support the new model.

Our CEO recently posted G«£Will 2013 be the year of SDN?G«• His answer, G«£ Maybe, but it will require both technical and business clarifications.G«• Before SDN can transform the network industry, we must really understand what it is.

Charlie Ashton
VP Marketing and Business Development
Hot Topics
IT Certification Exam Success In 4 Steps
Amy Arnold, CCNP/DP/Voice,  4/22/2014
Edge Devices Are The Brains Of The Network
Orhan Ergun, Network Architect,  4/23/2014
White Papers
Register for Network Computing Newsletters
Current Issue
2014 Private Cloud Survey
2014 Private Cloud Survey
Respondents are on a roll: 53% brought their private clouds from concept to production in less than one year, and 60% ≠extend their clouds across multiple datacenters. But expertise is scarce, with 51% saying acquiring skilled employees is a roadblock.
Twitter Feed