Virtual Network : Virtual Machine For Virtual Private Netwoking

Virtual Maching

The path to completely virtualized started with VMware virtualizing data centre infrastructure in 1998. Up until then, a minimum of on the x86 platform, if you wanted to run your workload you had to shop for a separate server for it; this was the core reason internet startups therein age needed such a lot capital, you had to shop for separate servers for every workload and you needed them to be during a centralized datacenter. Server sprawl was a real and huge issue. Shortly then, at Cambridge University, the Xen project launched.

Xen ended up being the virtualization platform of choice for multiple cloud providers with the budget to customize it. VMware managed to offer enterprises a path to running their workloads during a more efficient manner and the results of reducing a computer to a group of virtual private networking files led to a replacement wave of innovation.

It had been easy to back them up, it had been easy to possess replication, it had been easier to make sure that they were stable and insulate the user from the effects of unreliable hardware. This made VMware a billion-dollar company; this is also what unleashed a wave of innovation that we’ve seen within the cloud space since.

VMware represents a choice. VMware has doubled down on its Software-Defined Data Center strategy that has seen it also virtualize networking, storage and compute. I have been using VMware foundation from around 2004-2005 once I was introduced to the workstation and soon thereafter ESX.

Virtual Private Networking Module


Networking has always been a huge revenue earner; companies in the space have made a fortune. One would be wrong that the source of their revenue was the hardware. it's repeatedly been from the software.

Many OEMs required specialized training, that they had their own software and operating systems. as hardware veered towards becoming a commodity, and software the key sauce. This lock-in was very problematic for companies as, once you went down a path with one vendor, you were stuck and you couldn’t really choose another vendor (you would many times have to retrain your staff, etc).

Basically, this chaotic environment made it fit disruption. There was an enormous problem even within VMware around networking; you'll have a virtual private networking machine setting during a physical host, you'll move that virtual private networking machine to a physical host whose network you couldn’t access.

So, the subsequent thing that VMware did was to abstract networking, in 2012, with their purchase of Nicira. For a real while, anyone within the virtualization space had an enormous headache: how does one affect networking? This was NSX. This was a game-changer in networking because it removed the seller lock-in once and for all. Currently, the user uses three different networking vendors in tandem, just because it had been what we could afford at the time. Given that all the intelligence is handled by NSX all we would have liked to try to was use some basic managed switches and away we went. That’s saved us money and made it significantly easier to run our operations


Storage has had an equivalent model as networking and compute – the OS was how of selling storage hardware at a premium. Similar to the networking scenario, the software is additionally the magic has allowed OEMs to sell the storage at a premium.

At the top of the day, storage providers were writing their software atop of normal *NIX systems and selling them at a premium. This presented an enormous opportunity for the storage vendors but tons of pain for the purchasers, just because the vendors locked you into a proprietary platform.
You weren’t allowed to proportion your storage array with commodity hardware if you needed to. One had to shop for a replacement storage array from the present vendor. This presented several sizing challenges, e.g.

-One would either under-provision one’s storage array (raw capacity) for a coffee upfront purchase cost, this had one major issue – should your storage requirements grow faster than anticipated (which oft happened) there was no direct upgrade path and you had to shop for a replacement and really expensive storage array
One could over-provision one’s storage array and find yourself with a tool that's never fully utilized and, by the time they were fully utilized, the storage arrays would be the end of life

-Sizing for I/O requirements was particularly problematic; many companies ended up choosing to over-provision for this; there was no way to the size for what you needed at the time.

-Sizing for networking was another huge problem as you had to several times get expensive fibre gear that was only useful for the array

We’ve spoken to too many purchasers whose hardware is either end of life, or the OS for the storage array is not any longer supported, or they’ve filled up their array and the only solution that’s being proposed is another expensive monolithic storage array.
These are the issues that VMware’s and vSAN is looking to unravel. vSAN may be a distributed scale-out storage platform and it's designed to supply a storage pool within a VMware cluster. We use vSAN. we've DL 380 servers that double up as both compute and storage

vSAN takes an equivalent approach VMware has taken previously with networking and compute infrastructure: decoupling the storage OS from anybody vendor and allowing you as a corporation to make the choices regarding your hardware.

With software-defined storage, you're not locked into a specific hardware platform, you'll simply buy compatible commodity server hardware off any x86 vendor and roll out your storage. You have the flexibility to combine and match your requirements; you'll optimize your server for disk speed (say SSD) or capacity, etc. Your storage array scales infinitely, so you'll start with a really small low capacity group of servers and scale it out to over 1 petabyte. That’s a flexibility that’s unparalleled. You can value more highly to run affordable networking which will be upgraded over time, which can not be necessary as once you increase the number of pods because of the total throughput of the array increases. You can have up to 64 pods.

Post a Comment