Interoperability Issues: The Hot Spots for 2002 John Webster Senior Analyst Illuminata, Inc.

You can’t always get what you want But if you try sometime (You just might find) You get what you need

Interoperability 2002: The Hot Spots Fibre Channel SAN –Hardware –Operating System –Management Software –Support NAS –Backup/restore –RDBMS iSCSI –Version control out of control The role of users

DAS vs. Networked Storage AttributeDASNAS Ease of data managementHarderEasier Cost to manage equivalent amounts of data HigherLower Total utilization of storage assets LowerHigher Risk of unavailability of data HigherLower

Fibre Channel Hardware Hot Spots Nirvana –My SAN components come from multiple vendors, work together out of the box (plug and play) and my SAN works with everything in my shop that I want it to. Fall-back position 1: –I can make “best of breed” components work together somehow and make my SAN work with the important stuff in my shop.

Fibre Channel Hot Spots I can make it work provided that... –I have the resources (time, $$$) –I have the expertise –I can identify and use information support sources... And then Go.

Operating Systems Hot Spots Nirvana –My SAN is operating system agnostic Day 1 Fall-back Position 1 –I can support all of the present and planned operating systems in my shop Fall-back Position 2 –I can choose one from column A, and maybe one from column B Fall-back Position 3 –One Operating System only

SAN Management Software Hot Spots Nirvana –I can buy a package that gives me a single console, unified view of my SAN Fall-Back Position 1: –I can patch things together Fall-Back Position 2: –A console here, a console there

SAN Management Software Hot Spots SAN management “state of the state” No unified console view Because... –No common DB for reporting –Some proprietary APIs, but no open standards

SAN Support Hot Spots Nirvana –OTTC (One Throat To Choke) from Day 1 and Day 1 + Year 1, Day 1 + Year 2... Fall Back Position 1: –I can point with two fingers at once at two vendors Fall Back Position 2: –I’m not exactly sure where to point

Make my SAN — Vendor X Vendor X — The “vendor-specific” solution Hardware –Day 1 plug and play + multi-vendor interop with legacy possible Operating System Support –One from column A, maybe one from column B Management Software –Patchwork possible Support –OTTC possible

Make My SAN — SIs and SSPs Storage Integrators and Storage Service Providers Hardware: –Day 1 plug and play + multi-vendor interop with legacy possible Operating Support –Best chance for One from column A, one from column B Management Software –Patchwork possible or single multifunction console possible with SSPs Support –OTTC Possible

Make My SAN — DIY (do it yourself) Hardware –Day 1 plug and play + interop with legacy impossible Management Software –Patchwork possible but more likely console here, console there Support –OTTC possible with SSF. Otherwise, impossible

IP Alternatives — NAS Its plug and play so no interop issues here...right? Areas to research –Interoperability with other management software applications –Backup and restore software integration — NDMP here? –RDBMS (yes, RDBMS) support and certification –Microsoft certification (NOT...yet)

IP Alternatives — iSCSI The iSCSI value proposition is no interop issues here either...right? Developments to monitor and research –The IETF standard — what’s in Version 1 –To IP Sec or not to IP Sec –Two variants of iSCSI now probable

Can Virtualization Help? Interop and Virtualization Masking operating systems differences in the way they handle storage Bridging management software interop gaps But: –Architectural change means that getting to simplicity is not necessarily simple –Adds one more layer of overhead that must be understood

Interoperability Challenges 2002 Change the connotation of “Interoperability” from negative to positive Link CO-operability with INTER-operability Use the RFP and don’t be shy Can you become more directly involved in the process?

John Webster