Tuesday, March 02, 2010

 

 

Why Microsoft DirectAccess Represents a Real Paradigm Shift

 

Feed: The Edge Man
Posted on: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 8:37 PM
Author: tshinder-msft
Subject: Why Microsoft DirectAccess Represents a Real Paradigm Shift

 

DirectAccess is a new remote access technology enabled by the combination of Windows Server 2008 R2 and Windows 7. Unlike other remote access technologies such as reverse proxy, reverse NAT, SSL VPN gateways, and network layer VPNs, the goal of DirectAccess is to extend your network to any location in the world, so that your domain member client systems are always connected to the corpnet.

Think about the mix of remote access technologies you use now. Some of them might be in place to support partners, for which you want to provide very limited network access. But what about your employees? If you’re like me, you’ve probably spent most of your professional life trying to figure out how to give employees the information they need, in the most efficient way possible, so as to create the least frustration for both the employee and the Help Desk and IT overall. Most of all, you want to make sure this access is secure and that security doesn’t interfere with productivity.

There have always been two major stumbling points when providing productivity-enabling remote access to employees:

  • Employees often found it difficult to get the remote access solution working, or when they did, found the experience limiting in some way and therefore became less productive compared to when they were in the office
  • IT found it difficult to manage the security of the devices their employees were connecting from. Even in the ideal situation where you gave an employee a laptop with the corporate “golden image”, that image often fell out of compliance because the client system was not connected to the corpnet often enough to have the appropriate configuration settings applied through Group Policy or other desired configuration methods, such as System Center Configuration Manager. In addition, it was difficult to keep track of your off-campus fleet, since you never knew when they were going to connect to the corpnet again, if ever.

When you think about it, neither you nor your users ever wanted to use VPN. You never really wanted your employees to have to use SSL VPN gateways. You never actually wanted your users to have to gain access to resources over reverse proxies and NAT devices. You never really wanted to use any of the myriad number of remote access “artifices” that you’ve put in place.

But you did, because your goal was to provide your business an advantage by delivering out of office users access to information so that they could get their work done from anywhere.

But these solutions didn’t really didn’t do what they were supposed to do – at least not for you and your employee users:

  • How many times have you gone to a hotel an found out that it did not support PPTP or L2TP/IPsec?
  • How many times have you had all VPN access denied to you from your out of office location?
  • How many times have you had to deal with network ID collisions between the network you were on the corpnet ?
  • How many times did you need to use a web version of the application you wanted to use, because you couldn’t establish a VPN?
  • How many times have users called you or your help desk because the VPN connection did not work from the hotel room, conference center, partner network or customer’s office?
  • How many times did your users call regarding forgetting which name to use to connect to a resource when they’re out of the office, which of course is a different name when connected to the corpnet?
  • How many times did you wish that you had the same command and control over all your managed, domain member computers, regardless of their location?
  • How many times did you wish that all you had to do is turn on your computer, and you could connect to all the resources you were authorized to connect to, regardless of your location – the only thing you had to remember is to turn your computer on and enter your credentials?

No, we didn’t want these remote access solutions for our employees, but they were the best we could do.

What we actually wanted all this time was DirectAccess.

I can tell you that as a user, DirectAccess becomes a transformational experience. It completely changes the way I approach my work. In the past, if I left the office, I anticipated the traditional road warrior’s “negotiations with the remote access gods”.

The negotiations went something like this:

  • Please don’t assign me an address on the same network ID as my office
  • Please let L2TP/IPsec work
  • Please let PPTP
  • Please let secure Exchange RPC work
  • Please allow RDP to work
  • Please allow more than just HTTP/HTTPS outbound

You just never knew what the computing experience was going to be. If the network layer VPN worked, then almost everything worked. Of course, I’d have to fire off the VPN client first, and make sure the client was configured correctly (easy for me, not so easy for the average or even above average user). If neither network layer VPN protocol worked, then I spend my time living the second-class life of browser based applications. And file access experiences ranged from problematic to catastrophic.

There were often workarounds, but I could employ them because I’ve been doing networking for a long time. Average users would give up, call the Help Desk or try their best to do what they could with what they had – with the end result being a significant compromise in productivity and a flagging faith in the entire remote access experience and reduced expectations for what could be done when away from the office.

DirectAccess changes the game. Not only the game, but the entire playing field. So many of the problems related to remote access technologies that I’ve described so far are due to the users “location awareness”. While location awareness in the software is a very useful thing (and used by DirectAccess in the background), it’s not something you and your users want to worry about.

It’s the entire “location awareness” issue that creates problems for users:

  • Am I going to be able to use VPN?
  • What Web site URL do I use?
  • Am I going to have to reconfigure my application to work on the outside?
  • I’m going to have to do things differently when I’m on the outside

This “location awareness” creates both conscious and unconscious friction with the surface of user productivity. Energy is wasted and productivity is reduced. With DirectAccess, the entire “location awareness” issue is a non-issue. When you and your users connect with DirectAccess – the experience is the same all of the time.

  • The computing experience at work is the same
  • The computing experience at the ball game is the same
  • The computing experience at the hotel is the same
  • The computing experience at the conference center is the same
  • The computing experience at the customer site is the same

How is the computing experience the same in each of these scenarios? Because the following describes the computing experience for all five of the scenarios listed above:

  • Turn power on or wake the computer from sleep
  • Log on with your user name and password, or smart card and pin
  • Connect to corporate file shares, web sites, SharePoint sites, SQL servers, Exchange Servers, and just about any other server you can think of using their native application layer protocols
  • Close the computer lid and put the computer to sleep

Notice there was no “starting the VPN connection” or “connecting to the SSL VPN portal page” or anything else that required the user to be “location aware”.

This is what makes DirectAccess the paradigm shifting, transformational technology it is. And what really proves the point is how quickly you will take it for granted. That is a key component of what I consider to be transformational technology – you take it for granted because it was always supposed to be this way. In fact, you’ll find that the technology, over time, will seem boring to you. And for new computer users who have never experienced DirectAccess , they will find it really boring – or at least not exciting or transformational, because they will assume that is how remote computing should have always been done.

The story on the IT side of the house is just as compelling. Now you have access to the DA clients anytime a DirectAccess client is turned on; the user doesn’t even need to be logged on. You can apply patches, do “just in time” updates, install software, remove software, perform real-time remote management and configuration or assistance over RDP, and many more management tasks because the connection between DA clients and management servers is  bidirectional and always available between the management servers and DA clients.

Your DA clients will be in the same state of compliance as machines that never leave the corpnet and they have access to all the management, command and control systems you use to manage any machine on the corpnet.

The reason is that DirectAccess allows you to extend the corpnet and its management infrastructure to the DA client.

I know that you’ve heard about “paradigm shifts” and “transformational technologies” in the past. IPsec server and domain isolation had that potential. But it never caught on. Network Access Protection, something I can remember hearing a number of people at TechEd 2004 demand “I need it now!” But after it was released, sort of “hung in the stretch” (to use a horse racing term). Why? I don’t know if there are any official reasons why, but I suspect that these two fantastic, potentially game changing technologies were just too complex and the expected return on investment for dealing with such a level of complexity ended up being too low.

This can’t and must not happen to DirectAccess – there are two main reasons why I don’t see DA “dying on the vine”:

  • Although some in the media have communicated that it is complex, in fact, there are far fewer moving parts that you might think – most who consider it overly complex have not tried to set it up
  • Many of the moving parts are already deployed on your network and you can easily integrate them into your DirectAccess deployment
  • The gains in improved manageability will more than pay for the time it takes to learn the new technology
  • The gains in end user satisfaction and increased productivity will not be incremental, they will be differential – meaning that end user productivity will increase significantly after DA is deployed, and will continue to increase over time as the frictionless DirectAccess experience is fully integrated into the computer users’ ways of working

So there you have it – my reasons why DirectAccess will change the world, and it’s a world that both IT and end-users have always wanted to live in.

It’s also a world that I want to help you get to. In the following months this blog will be dedicated to UAG DirectAccess and provide you hints, tips, tricks, ideas, opinions, workarounds, designs, and experiences that will speed your path to DirectAccess deployment. Because the only way you’ll really know the joy of the DirectAccess experience is to experience it. And after that, you’ll take it for granted – but you’ll be taking for granted an all new world of computing – one that allows you to get more done faster without ever needing to think about where you are.

HTH,

Tom

Thomas W. Shinder MD

Microsoft ISDUA – UAG DirectAccess – Anywhere Access Team (AAT)

tomsh@microsoft.com


View article...

Tuesday, March 02, 2010 5:49:30 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)  #    Comments [0]  | 
Friday, February 19, 2010

 

Snowstorms Pummel Worker Productivity, Citrix Survey Finds

 

Published Friday, February 12, 2010 5:27 PM by David Marshall 

 

Behind the traffic pile-ups, cancelled flights and power outages caused by recent record storms in the Middle Atlantic States, there’s another sobering story – the enormous cumulative loss of business productivity caused by employees’ inability to work from home when commuting became impossible. A survey of 500 people in four states and the District of Columbia, commissioned by Citrix Online, found that 52% of respondents have lost six or more hours of work due to this winter’s severe storms; this represents a potential loss of nearly 50 million total man hours of productivity in these states. Half have been forced to cancel or delay a meeting in the last year due to inclement weather. Further, 47% stated they have no technology tools, flex time, telework provisions or alternate assignments to assist when commuting is a problem.

“Enabling your employees to work from anywhere is simple,” said Chuck Wilsker, President and CEO of the Telework Coalition and a member of Citrix Online’s Worldwide Workplace Council. “The keys are to plan ahead, determine the specific needs of your organization, identify best practices for managing your virtual workplace, and using technologies, which are both suited to productivity and can address your benchmarks for success. The first application I ever used that allowed me to work remotely was GoToMyPC and it’s still a wonderful solution. Citrix Online’s Worldwide Workplace Council has authored a paper outlining the five steps to a virtual workplace program.”

For example, Ira H. Siegal, CPA, of Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania, an affiliate of 123College.com, inc., turned to GoToMeeting     when he saw that snow threatened to prevent attendees from coming to a seminar last week. He recalled, “As I watched the snow get deeper, some of the people who had registered to attend my seminar started to question whether it would occur. I polled them, and they said they would have trouble shoveling out their cars and navigating the roads to make it to my event. I realized I needed a back-up plan, and decided to conduct an online seminar instead. GoToMeeting     saved the day for me, and allowed me to conduct business from the safety of my home.”

The Citrix Online survey, which covered New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Virginia/D.C., and Maryland, found that 38% of respondents were unable to commute to work at least once during the storms in December 2009 and January and February 2010. For many, this meant a lost day of productivity; results revealed 50% of those surveyed had no work situation away from their office.

For more information about Citrix Online, a division of Citrix Systems, Inc. (NASDAQ: CTXS), or Work Shifting, visit http://www.citrixonline.com/ or http://www.workshifting.com/.

 

Filed under: Survey

Friday, February 19, 2010 8:54:11 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)  #    Comments [0]  | 

 

Microsoft DirectAccess Connectivity Assistant

 

Feed: Bink.nu
Posted on: Saturday, February 13, 2010 4:48 PM
Author: Steven Bink
Subject: Microsoft DirectAccess Connectivity Assistant

 

Check out the Microsoft DirectAccess Connectivity Assistant, the newest edition to the Windows® Optimized Desktop Toolkit 2010 to help reduce costs and improve the experience of DirectAccess. 

The Microsoft DirectAccess Connectivity Assistant (DCA) helps organizations reduce the cost of supporting DirectAccess users and significantly improve their connectivity experience. This Solution Accelerator is part of the Windows® Optimized Desktop Toolkit 2010 (WODT 2010).

 The Microsoft DirectAccess Connectivity Assistant (DCA) helps organizations reduce the cost of supporting DirectAccess users and significantly improve their connectivity experience.

DCA informs mobile users of their connectivity status at all times; provides tools to help them reconnect on their own if problems arise; and creates diagnostics to help mobile users provide IT staff with key information if necessary—all to help customers operate with more efficiency, and at a lower cost.

DCA is the newest addition to the Windows® Optimized Desktop Toolkit 2010, which is designed to help IT pros plan, deliver, and operate the right desktop technologies for users across their organization.

The download includes the following components:

  • Microsoft_DirectAccess_Connectivity_Assistant.zip
  • Microsoft_DirectAccess_Connectivity_Assistant_x32.msi
  • Microsoft_DirectAccess_Connectivity_Assistant_x64.msi
  • Microsoft_DirectAccess_Connectivity_Assistant_DeploymentGuide.docx
  • Microsoft_DirectAccess_Connectivity_Assistant_Release_Notes.en.htm
  • DirectAccess Connectivity Assistant GP.admx
  • DirectAccess Connectivity Assistant GP.adml

Download details DirectAccess Connectivity Assistant

Send via e-mail | Submit to Digg | Add to Live Favorites

View article...

Friday, February 19, 2010 8:34:40 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)  #    Comments [0]  | 
Wednesday, December 31, 2008

 

December 22, 2008 11:57 AM PST

The great paradigm shift of cloud computing is not self-service...

Posted by James Urquhart

There has been significant discussion over the short life of the term "cloud computing" about how little it differs from concepts like managed hosting and ASPs. And there is some truth to these observations; if you really look closely, what are the key differences between EC2 and a more traditional managed hosting provider? Some would say multi-tenancy, self-service and pay-per-use (including billing and elastic capacity). With specific regard to EC2, I would tend to agree.

(I would also hasten to point out that Amazon provides some very PaaS-like services in conjunction with EC2, such as Simple Queuing Service (SQS) and SimpleDB.)

However, if this is the great "paradigm shift" of cloud computing, as offered by smart people like Krishnan Subramanian of CloudAve, then let me offer that these basic extensions to existing hosting models will be peanuts next to a shift that will create one of the most significant market opportunities since the explosive growth of the Internet itself. I'm not dealing in hyperbole here; I honestly believe that there is a clear evolutionary step to the cloud occurring well after stand-alone self-service clouds are mainstream (which they arguably are today) that will inspire massive innovation.

That game changing technology disruption will be the federation of disparate clouds, and the distribution of software, data and billing across commercial and private cloud boundaries. In other words, the introduction of secure, reliable workload mobility in an extension of the Internet itself--an "Intercloud", so to speak.

Workload mobility is one of the key innovations of the virtual server world (though it borrowed heavily from its technical ancestry). Technologies like VMotion and other live migration technologies allow system administrators to move running workloads from one machine to another, but today they are generally limited to one subnet.

However, expand the reach of VM motion to cross not only subnet boundaries, but even organizational boundaries, and you get an interesting new world of possibilities. Some of these have been anticipated for some time, but as I talk to more and more people about what could happen here, more and more use cases crop up. For example:

  • Follow the Sun: Move workloads to where they are being most utilized at a given time, usually the "day" side of the planet.
  • Follow the Moon: Move workloads to where power is cheapest, usually the "night" side of the planet.
  • Follow the Law: Move workloads to where the legal and regulatory environment is optimal for the task being executed or the data being stored.
  • Optimize Latency: Move workloads to where network routing is optimized for a system of components.
  • Optimize Utilization: Move workloads to where the optimal use of compute and/or storage utilization is achieved.
  • Optimize Cost: Move workloads to where the cost of computing is as cheap as possible for the workload at hand.

There must be several, perhaps even dozens, of ideas workload mobility would trigger for entrepreneurs and established service providers alike beyond these. I won't deign to have thought through all of the possibilities. The truth is, though, we will probably end up creating complex assemblies of basic sets of policies, mixing and matching as required to meet service levels.

To get to this level of workload mobility, four key areas need to be addressed:

  • The mechanism behind workload mobility itself. We've got a great headstart from the likes of VMWare VMotion, but there needs to be more motion aware infrastructure to make this happen ubiquitously. For example, how do you handle what I like to call impedence mismatches between different infrastructure providers, such as one using AMIs and another kvm guest images?
  • Integrated and ubiquitous security and control mechanisms. Security for the obvious reasons, but giving the illusion of control is a big part of the workload mobility story. To the owner of the workloads, they should always have the illusion that they are running in their own data center, regardless of where the workload is actually running--though they should control that too.
  • Service Level Automation. This is a critical aspect of trust, perhaps the most illusive enterprise requirement in the cloud today. Define service levels at least in part in terms that automation systems can use to tweak elasticity, availability and resource consumption. That automation, in turn, guarantees within reason that customer service levels will be constantly adhered to. Without service level automation across organizational boundaries, it will be impossible to trust systems that become distributed among multiple providers.
  • Integration and interoperability protocols and services. We long ago left the world in which production software can be moved around in units called "applications". Almost any system today is comprised of multiple end user applications and back-end services that must coordinate to complete their respective functions. This does not even take into account the management backplane that exists to support those complex systems, that also must coordinate across the same organizational boundaries. All of this has to be available on the shared network in which workload is mobile. If we want workload to be mobile across the Internet, then it must exist as protocols or services on the Internet itself.

The final step of the cloud computing maturity model requires that these requirements be addressed. There is some debate about from what part of the compute landscape these services should be delivered, and how the various "impedence mismatches" of disparate cloud platforms will be handled (or even if they can be handled). Of course, I believe that the network will play a major role, but others see options in pure server software or virtual appliance implementations.

Any way you cut it, though, if you think self-service changed computing and created opportunities, wait until you see the "Intercloud".

James Urquhart is a seasoned field technologist with almost 20 years of experience in distributed systems development and deployment, focusing on service-oriented architectures, cloud computing, and virtualization. James is currently market manager for the Data Center 3.0 strategy at Cisco Systems. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET.

Topics:
Cloud Computing,
IAAS (infrastructure as a service),
PaaS (platform as a service)

The great paradigm shift of cloud computing is not self-service... | The Wisdom of Clouds - CNET News

Wednesday, December 31, 2008 12:28:52 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)  #    Comments [0]  | 
Friday, December 05, 2008

 

Gartner Releases Data on Hot Enterprise Topics

Gartner's 27th annual datacenter conference is producing research related to energy consumption, virtualization, cloud computing. Here are some of the most interesting numbers revealed at the conference.

Forty-two percent of IT professionals polled at the Gartner conference operate three or more datacenters in North America.

Forty-five percent are expanding or planning to expand datacenters in the next two years, while 43 percent are consolidating.

A standard 9,000 square foot, Tier 3 datacenter that supports 150 watts per square foot will cost approximately US$21.3 million (about Rs 105 crore) to build, with $1 million (about Rs 5 crore) in annual electrical costs.

Green IT practices that minimize use of chiller plants, fans and pumps, lighting and power supplies can more than halve the power costs of running a datacenter.

An aggressively "green" enterprise will pay $560,000 (about Rs 2.8 crore) in annual electrical expenses for a datacenter with a 500 kilowatt IT load. Enterprises with archaic datacenter practices will pay as much as $1.3 million (about Rs 650 lakh).

In a conventional datacenter, 35 percent to 50 percent of electrical energy is devoted to cooling. With best practices, that proportion is reduced to 15 percent.

Twenty-six percent of conference attendees buy green products only when they lower costs, save space or defer datacenter construction.

Thirty-four percent will buy green products even if they increase costs.

Storage spending is growing almost three times faster than the IT budget as a whole. From 2007 to 2011, storage spending will increase more than 7 percent a year, compared with annual IT budget growth of only 2.5 percent.
By 2012, users will install 6.5 times the amount of terabytes they installed in 2008.

Server virtualization, one of the key technologies driving costs down in datacenters, is suitable for about 70 percent of workloads.

Today, only 12 percent of x86 server workloads are running in virtual machines.
By 2013, that number will be 61 percent.

One out of every four x86 workloads deployed or redeployed in 2008 is being installed in a virtual machine. Still, vendor licensing, pricing and support plans are limiting virtualization efforts, according to 21 percent of conference attendees.

About 70 percent of virtual machines today are used in production. Just a few years ago, most were used only in test and development roles.

The server virtualization market will grow 30 percent a year through 2013, reaching $6.8 billion (about Rs 34,000 crore).

Desktop virtualization will also take off, with the number of virtualized PCs growing from less than 5 million in 2007 to 660 million by 2011.

Only two major server operating systems will experience significant growth through 2010 -- Windows and Linux. But lightweight operating systems will take off with double-digit growth, including JeOS, a variant of Ubuntu configured specifically for virtual appliances.

Thirty-eight percent of conference attendees are using some type of external cloud computing service.
By 2012 at least 14 percent of the infrastructure at Fortune 1000 companies will be service-oriented, scalable and elastic -- operated as if it they were "private clouds" for each company's users.

Source : Network World

Jon Brodkin

CIO India - Gartner Releases Data on Hot Enterprise Topics

Friday, December 05, 2008 12:21:14 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)  #    Comments [0]  | 

December 04, 2008 | Comments: (1) | TrackBacks: (0)

Server virtualization: Gartner's view through 2011

Gartner predicts some game-changing numbers for server virtualization as the mass market adopts the technology into production environments

TAGS: Server Virtualization

This week in Las Vegas, Gartner's VP Distinguished Analyst Thomas Bittman delivered the keynote address at the 27th annual Gartner Data Center Conference. And as expected, one of the hot topics of discussion was server virtualization.

Bittman stated that only two or three years ago, server virtualization was mostly being used for test and development purposes. But now, the technology is being accepted into production environments to the tune of about 70 percent of all datacenters using virtual machines in some sort of production role.

[ To learn more about server virtualization, check out this InfoClipz video. ]

Bittman also announced three remarkable predictions about the virtualization industry:

  • By 2012, at least 14 percent of the infrastructure and operations architecture of Fortune 1000 companies will be managed and delivered much like a cloud-computing provider, internally. These "private clouds" are essentially flexible computing networks designed to be like the solutions being offered by public providers such as Google and Amazon.
  • Between 2007 and 2011, Bittman expects that the installed base of virtual machines will grow more than tenfold.
  • And by 2012, he believes that the majority of x86 server workloads will be running within a virtual machine.

When talking about this hot virtualization technology, Bittman adds, "our key advice is to look beyond simple consolidation and cost savings. Virtualization can be the catalyst to drive many fundamental important changes in architectures, processes, and cultures. Even if short-term attention needs to be given to cost-savings, make sure you build a foundation that can be leveraged in a few years. Virtualization 'unlocks' cloud computing potential internally and externally."

Posted by David Marshall on December 4, 2008 07:15 AM

Server virtualization: Gartner's view through 2011 |Virtualization Report | David Marshall | InfoWorld

Friday, December 05, 2008 12:17:10 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)  #    Comments [0]  | 
Sunday, October 12, 2008

 

Thomas Shinder Blog RSS

All Blogs  »  Thomas Shinder Blog  »  News ISA Central  »  Blog article: Jim Harrison LIVE (sort of) - Virtualize Your ISA or Forefront TMG Servers

Jim Harrison LIVE (sort of) - Virtualize Your ISA or Forefront TMG Servers

From the site:

“In the past, ISA has had very limited or no support on Microsoft’s virtualization platform.  Now, ISA and Forefront Threat Management Gateway (TMG) is supported .  I met up with Jim Harrison to get some guidance on what you need to think about when you virtualize your ISA/TMG servers.  We quickly dive into a whiteboard session on the various ways you can configure Hyper-V / virtual server to work with ISA/TMG and dig into the advantages and disadvantages of each network configuration such as:

  • Performance
  • Management
  • Administration
  • Security

Some other things we talk about:

  • Why placing TMG on the parent is a bad idea and how you should configure the parent partition
  • Configuration options of the actual ISA/TMG server
  • Failover, Clustering, and Quick Migration with ISA / TMG in a virtual environment
  • Configuration changes you should make for any host which faces the Internet

View the security considerations for virtualized ISA / TMG deployments guide / whitepaper Jim wrote.

See KB article 957006 which states ISA (and other) products are officially supported on Hyper-V.”

=====================================

Head on over to http://edge.technet.com/Media/Virtualize-your-ISA-...rvers/ to watch and listen to Jim Harrison’s great presentation on deploying an ISA or TMG firewall in a virtualized environment. You’ll be glad you did!

HTH,

Tom

Thomas W Shinder, M.D., MCSE
Sr. Consultant / Technical Writer
Prowess Consulting www.prowessconsulting.com

PROWESS CONSULTING documentation | integration | virtualization
Email: tshinder@isaserver.org
MVP — Forefront Edge Security (ISA/TMG/IAG)

This entry was posted on Sunday, October 12th, 2008 at 9:54 am and is filed under News, ISA Central. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Thomas Shinder Blog » Blog Archive » Jim Harrison LIVE (sort of) - Virtualize Your ISA or Forefront TMG Servers

Sunday, October 12, 2008 5:29:01 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)  #    Comments [0]  | 
Friday, October 10, 2008

 

Virtual vs. Physical Appliances: 4 Compelling Reasons for Change

by Ronan Kavanagh, CEO, SpamTitan

Be the first to comment | I like it!
Tags: anti-spam, email, security, spam, virtual appliances, VMware

October 10, 2008, 12:26 PM —  SpamTitan — 

Virtual v’s Physical Appliances – 4 compelling reasons for change

Executive Summary

Virtual Appliances have appeared on the horizon as an unstoppable force. Where traditional appliances supplanted the office and data centre server, the virtual appliance has taken this to a new level and in turn rendered the incumbent effectively obsolete. Where appliances addressed critical needs not addressed by office servers, they also introduced further complexities and difficulties which are easily resolved by virtual servers. This white paper takes a look at the advantages of virtual appliances in comparison with physical appliances and addresses some of the key benefits. Benefits which include ease of evaluation and testing, ease of deployment, streamlined redundancy and backup, and the key benefits of scalability and mobility....

The Need for Scaleable Architecture

Most organizations today spread their applications across servers based on functional
boundaries. Both large and small companies use email servers, file servers, web servers
and so on. Over time, the trend has been to dedicate a specific server for each function.
This allows for a scaleable, highly flexible architecture. As the organization grows, greater demands are placed on the infrastructure. Not just from an increase in the number of users, but also in terms of the geographic footprint. Branch offices will require their own servers for certain applications. Fault tolerance also plays a part, driving larger installations towards multiple, duplicated servers in preference over a single monolithic system.

As servers don’t generally require user interaction, the trend has been to use vendor supplied appliances for certain types of applications. An appliance allows for a relatively small footprint and also provides more of a plug and play infrastructure over the traditional server application experience. As load increases, new appliances can be brought on-stream and the load distributed evenly. The system administrator can maintain a surplus of similar appliances and install these in the event of failure or increased load. Dividing the application base into component parts and spreading these components across multiple appliances is a tried and tested method of delivering a scaleable architecture.

However, industry research by VMware shows that the system usage per appliance can be as low as 15% of the available processing power.† Effectively, the server budget is over six hundred percent higher than necessary. Maintaining a pool of idle servers on standby in case of increased load or for failure recovery, can adversely affect the efficiency even further. Amalgamating applications on each server can go a long way toward resolving the usage issues but at a cost. Running different applications on the same server loses the scalability of the appliance solution and can create security issues.

In addition, maintaining a homogenous environment of appliances is extremely difficult if not impossible. Complicating this is the need to upgrade different applications at different times. A new appliance can have a different platform configuration which will make it difficult to migrate users from an older appliance to a new one.

Virtual Appliances

A virtual appliance is one which subdivides the physical hardware into multiple virtual machines. Each virtual machine provides a ...  See more at the source

Source - Virtual vs. Physical Appliances: 4 Compelling Reasons for Change | ITworld

Friday, October 10, 2008 10:18:47 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)  #    Comments [0]  | 
Wednesday, June 04, 2008

Feed: Planet V12n
Posted on: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 11:28 AM
Author: Planet V12n
Subject: Hyper-V could benefit from VMware’s Xen-based competition (Server Virtualization Blog)

If Hyper-V doesn’t convert the VMware faithful as soon as Microsoft makes its hypervisor generally available later this year, it may get a little help from its friends: Xen-based virtualization platforms.

Some like IT consultant Ardalan Dlawar believe that Microsoft will leverage support for Xen-based platforms to increase competition with VMware. “And Xen will have more third-party support and fewer compatibility issues,” according to Dlawar.

Despite user arguments that ;Hyper-V will have to deliver more than a lower price tag to win users, Hyper-V will certainly get consideration from many VMware customers. While organizations want to maximize their VMware investment, especially enterprise customers which deploy tens or hundreds of VMware virtual machines, Hyper-V evals will most likely be deployed, according to Andi Mann, the research director at Boulder, Colo.-based Enterprise Management Associates (EMA).

Based on a survey of more than 600 enterprises, EMA found about 30% of enterprises have already planned a Hyper-V deployment even with Hyper-V’s general availability several months away. In addition, Microsoft is actually within 10% of VMware in current and planned enterprise deployments according to EMA’s data. Also consider this EMA finding: Xen-based platforms already account for more than 40% of current or planned deployments, the data suggests that the market demand for VMware alternatives won’t disappear.

“VMware is still way out in front in server virtualization,” said Mann, “but both Microsoft and Citrix Systems are definitely catching up.”

Of course, VMware and Microsoft aren’t the only options available. As managers continue utilizing toolsets available from Xen-based products such as Citrix’s XenServer and Virtual Iron Software, VMware and Microsoft are both working on tool sets that enable users manage their virtualization counterparts respectively.

“Both VMware and Microsoft understand that they are not going to be the only players on the market, they recognize that customers are leveraging their competitors’ technology in different parts of their businesses,” according to Adnan Hindi, the VP of operations at ScienceLogic in Reston, Va. Hindi said that companies like his, which produces cross-platform appliances, will benefit from multiple-platform virtual landscapes. As shops continue to see benefit in the utilities that Xen-based products offer, Hindi sees a universal virtualization tool set ultimately working itself out; these tools would essentially equalize platforms in the market and dilute decision making in choosing a virtualization platform largely down to cost.

Over the past year, there’s been a lot of talk about VMware’s cost of VMware. But the price of VMware Server is right for small businesses, said Brett Riale, an IT consultant in Pittsburgh, who feels “truly blessed that programs as functional as VMware Server have been released for free.” Riale is hesitant to trust another Microsoft virtualization product after “the debacle” that was Virtual Server 2005. “Unless it absolutely outperforms VMware,” Riale said that he won’t consider Hyper-V in the near future. And Dave Baughman, a systems administrator for Muncie, Ind.-based Ontario Systems, thinks that his ESX system is “a consistent platform” and that the price of support is worth their investment. “Most of the cost is for support and (VMware’s) support is very good,” says Baugham.

But what will happen when all the Microsoft customers with enterprise agreements get a taste of Hyper-V support? Or if Microsoft offers more third-party support for Xen?

Howard Holton, a system engineer, said that market share will shift in Hyper-V’s favor.

“Hyper-V is an excellent solution for many of those that cannot afford the steep cost that ESX server requires,” says Holton, who has already has a positive experience working with the release candidate and points out that for most data center operations, VMotion’s High Availability (HA) is overkill. ”Hyper-V fits into the market below VMware for hosts that do not need true HA.”

Holton said that in the long run Hyper-V might win out over VMware because Citrix’s XenServer has finally given Xen a roadmap. XenServer is the spoiler, with a lower TCO than VMware. Although price hasn’t deterred Holton from delivering VMware to his customers in the past, he predicted that Hyper-V will only increase in value.

“As a value-added reseller in the small to midsized space, VMware is the leading virtualization product that I offer. That is changing.”

View article...

Wednesday, June 04, 2008 6:11:15 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)  #    Comments [0]  | 

Theme design by Jelle Druyts

Pick a theme: