Comments for The Virtual Data Center http://thevirtualdc.com A Virtual Team Blog about the VDC and How To Get There Wed, 08 Sep 2010 22:23:18 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.1 Comment on Choosing Between Azure and VMM Private Clouds by Cloud options- vCloud, Azure, Microsoft etc | UKFast Blog http://thevirtualdc.com/?p=157#comment-13362 Cloud options- vCloud, Azure, Microsoft etc | UKFast Blog Tue, 04 Aug 2009 10:40:43 +0000 http://thevirtualdc.com/?p=157#comment-13362 [...] morning I read Alan Muphys blog over at the Virtual DataCenter site. He talks about the vCloud, Azure and Microsoft. I dropped a comment on his site which is [...] […] morning I read Alan Muphys blog over at the Virtual DataCenter site. He talks about the vCloud, Azure and Microsoft. I dropped a comment on his site which is […]

]]> Comment on Why Microsoft Should Finally Buy Citrix by Rohn Wood http://thevirtualdc.com/?p=153#comment-12499 Rohn Wood Fri, 24 Jul 2009 17:27:27 +0000 http://thevirtualdc.com/?p=153#comment-12499 For all of us who live in the OpenSource world, would have to say that this is the worst idea I have ever heard. For all of us who live in the OpenSource world, would have to say that this is the worst idea I have ever heard.

]]> Comment on Choosing Between Azure and VMM Private Clouds by Stu Fox http://thevirtualdc.com/?p=157#comment-12170 Stu Fox Mon, 20 Jul 2009 21:39:40 +0000 http://thevirtualdc.com/?p=157#comment-12170 There's three levels here: 1. Private clouds, enabled with hyper-V R2 & VMM, built on the Dynamic Datacenter Toolkit for Enterprises announced at WPC last week. DDT-E I think was slated for release early next year. 2. Public clouds, enabled with Hyper-V R2 & VMM, build on the Dynamic Datacenter Toolkit for Hosters already available. 3. Azure, providing the application hosting platform which addresses a different set of needs than private or public clouds. Notice that 1 & 2 are built on the same platform so there is definitely a link between private & public clouds. Disclaimer: I work for Microsoft NZ, but this is my opinion and not that of my employer. There’s three levels here:
1. Private clouds, enabled with hyper-V R2 & VMM, built on the Dynamic Datacenter Toolkit for Enterprises announced at WPC last week. DDT-E I think was slated for release early next year.
2. Public clouds, enabled with Hyper-V R2 & VMM, build on the Dynamic Datacenter Toolkit for Hosters already available.
3. Azure, providing the application hosting platform which addresses a different set of needs than private or public clouds.

Notice that 1 & 2 are built on the same platform so there is definitely a link between private & public clouds.

Disclaimer: I work for Microsoft NZ, but this is my opinion and not that of my employer.

]]> Comment on Choosing Between Azure and VMM Private Clouds by Top 5 Planet V12n blog posts week 29 | News, Articles and Analysis about Virtualization http://thevirtualdc.com/?p=157#comment-12029 Top 5 Planet V12n blog posts week 29 | News, Articles and Analysis about Virtualization Sun, 19 Jul 2009 13:22:07 +0000 http://thevirtualdc.com/?p=157#comment-12029 [...] Murphy - Choosing between Azure and VMM Private CloudsI do like the idea of them embracing private clouds with VMM, a logical step when competing against [...] […] Murphy - Choosing between Azure and VMM Private CloudsI do like the idea of them embracing private clouds with VMM, a logical step when competing against […]

]]> Comment on Choosing Between Azure and VMM Private Clouds by John Cass http://thevirtualdc.com/?p=157#comment-11821 John Cass Fri, 17 Jul 2009 01:14:28 +0000 http://thevirtualdc.com/?p=157#comment-11821 I will chime in from a corporate MS shop point of view. I love the idea of Azure, I have been developing with the beta and I think it has great potential. I also believe that cloud computing may be viable to corporations in the future. But not now. Most corporate entities do not trust the cloud. Nor are they akin to embrace their financial, legal and other sensative data living outside their firewalls. Yet many corporations are keen on moving to a SaaS or SOA architecture. Azure would be a good match for these Mid-level corporations that want the governance, security and dependability of running their own internal clouds, while having the flexability and scalability that services provide. I know that MS has nixed Azure for private cloud use, and I think they are managing themselves right out of the cloud market. They will never be able to compete on the public cloud level, they just can not match the pricing, uptime and support that other companies can provide. They should not foray into the data center market place. Microsoft should have focused on virtual private clouds. Then as more and more corporations become "comfortable" with the cloud, they would be in a position to take on the hosting of all the applications written using Azure. I will chime in from a corporate MS shop point of view.

I love the idea of Azure, I have been developing with the beta and I think it has great potential. I also believe that cloud computing may be viable to corporations in the future. But not now.

Most corporate entities do not trust the cloud. Nor are they akin to embrace their financial, legal and other sensative data living outside their firewalls. Yet many corporations are keen on moving to a SaaS or SOA architecture. Azure would be a good match for these Mid-level corporations that want the governance, security and dependability of running their own internal clouds, while having the flexability and scalability that services provide.

I know that MS has nixed Azure for private cloud use, and I think they are managing themselves right out of the cloud market. They will never be able to compete on the public cloud level, they just can not match the pricing, uptime and support that other companies can provide. They should not foray into the data center market place.

Microsoft should have focused on virtual private clouds. Then as more and more corporations become “comfortable” with the cloud, they would be in a position to take on the hosting of all the applications written using Azure.

]]> Comment on Choosing Between Azure and VMM Private Clouds by James Crawshaw http://thevirtualdc.com/?p=157#comment-11766 James Crawshaw Thu, 16 Jul 2009 07:36:00 +0000 http://thevirtualdc.com/?p=157#comment-11766 On the vCloud front, it is clear to see the model of developing in house and deploying to the service provider cloud. I understand the process etc. What I also see on the Microsoft side is that regardless of their Azure platform (which I firmly beleive is a separate product area to the vCloud type offering), Microsoft have a toolset which enables the build of private, public, shared - or whatever definition you might like to use - cloud (System Center, Hyper-V, PowerShell etc). Therefore, what is stopping people from building their own clouds and then approaching 3rd parties (MS partners) to host the solution for them? This is in essence the same as the vCloud paradigm. Certainly, the company whom I am writing on behalf of understand this and are aiming to be a key enabler of these processes in the marketplace. In summary - your article is an excellent commentary on the whys and wherefores of cloud based solutions and I feel that next step for the MS solutions simply requires MS partners to build packages which add the functionality for end users/businesses. On the vCloud front, it is clear to see the model of developing in house and deploying to the service provider cloud. I understand the process etc.
What I also see on the Microsoft side is that regardless of their Azure platform (which I firmly beleive is a separate product area to the vCloud type offering), Microsoft have a toolset which enables the build of private, public, shared - or whatever definition you might like to use - cloud (System Center, Hyper-V, PowerShell etc). Therefore, what is stopping people from building their own clouds and then approaching 3rd parties (MS partners) to host the solution for them? This is in essence the same as the vCloud paradigm. Certainly, the company whom I am writing on behalf of understand this and are aiming to be a key enabler of these processes in the marketplace.

In summary - your article is an excellent commentary on the whys and wherefores of cloud based solutions and I feel that next step for the MS solutions simply requires MS partners to build packages which add the functionality for end users/businesses.

]]> Comment on Regional Cloud Providers: Buy Local with a “Cloud Franchise” by Alan http://thevirtualdc.com/?p=156#comment-11641 Alan Tue, 14 Jul 2009 04:28:28 +0000 http://thevirtualdc.com/?p=156#comment-11641 You bring up a great point on management standardization. I didn't think about micro cloud providers bringing their own management. I do think VMware would like to change that with vApp and vCloud, but there's no guarantee any individual micro cloud provider would embrace those as the singular management platform. And I don't know that MS has stated what they'll be using to manage Azure. SCOM I'm guessing, which would be nice for cloud franchisees b/c they could manage their .Net apps all the way up the stack from their local install through the franchise all they way up to Azure. We'll see. I like Fast Cloud; consider it coined. Very nice. :) -Alan You bring up a great point on management standardization. I didn’t think about micro cloud providers bringing their own management. I do think VMware would like to change that with vApp and vCloud, but there’s no guarantee any individual micro cloud provider would embrace those as the singular management platform. And I don’t know that MS has stated what they’ll be using to manage Azure. SCOM I’m guessing, which would be nice for cloud franchisees b/c they could manage their .Net apps all the way up the stack from their local install through the franchise all they way up to Azure. We’ll see.

I like Fast Cloud; consider it coined. Very nice. :)

-Alan

]]> Comment on Regional Cloud Providers: Buy Local with a “Cloud Franchise” by Justin Foster http://thevirtualdc.com/?p=156#comment-11634 Justin Foster Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:11:34 +0000 http://thevirtualdc.com/?p=156#comment-11634 I really like this concept. The franchisor would establish the billing systems, SLA, legal, base infrastructure requirements and do the marketing while the franchisee would provide the infrastructure and regional availability. The franchise model would also provide for a much needed standardization of the management API and formats. The more tiny public Cloud providers that pop up, the more diverse the management options become and the lower the portability. Nice idea! You should call it Fast Cloud :) I really like this concept. The franchisor would establish the billing systems, SLA, legal, base infrastructure requirements and do the marketing while the franchisee would provide the infrastructure and regional availability.

The franchise model would also provide for a much needed standardization of the management API and formats. The more tiny public Cloud providers that pop up, the more diverse the management options become and the lower the portability.

Nice idea! You should call it Fast Cloud :)

]]> Comment on Virtual Networking: Overlapping IPs Inside the Cloud by James Urquhart http://thevirtualdc.com/?p=149#comment-5559 James Urquhart Tue, 07 Apr 2009 15:41:44 +0000 http://thevirtualdc.com/?p=149#comment-5559 Cisco is acutely aware of this problem as well, and is working with the IETF on the LISP protocol as a long term solution. LISP is a location/identity seperation protocol, and serves the purpose of separating the location address from the identifier of the workload in network terms. The result is a public/private addressing hybrid that works quite well in mobile, cloud and static applications. Check it out. It's actually quite cool. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-farinacci-lisp-12 Cisco is acutely aware of this problem as well, and is working with the IETF on the LISP protocol as a long term solution. LISP is a location/identity seperation protocol, and serves the purpose of separating the location address from the identifier of the workload in network terms.

The result is a public/private addressing hybrid that works quite well in mobile, cloud and static applications.

Check it out. It’s actually quite cool.

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-farinacci-lisp-12

]]> Comment on Security Cloud Assumptions: Responding to Hoff by Ravi http://thevirtualdc.com/?p=148#comment-4475 Ravi Mon, 23 Mar 2009 05:57:29 +0000 http://thevirtualdc.com/?p=148#comment-4475 Hi Alan, This question is not related to the posting. This is one way I thought I can contact you. In the Virtual Data center deployments/cloud, do you see a chance of IP address clash with the subscribers? Subscribers would want to have freedom to select the IP addresses. In such cases, how the network setup will be? Thanks Hi Alan,
This question is not related to the posting. This is one way I thought I can contact you.
In the Virtual Data center deployments/cloud, do you see a chance of IP address clash with the subscribers? Subscribers would want to have freedom to select the IP addresses. In such cases, how the network setup will be?

Thanks

]]>