<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Brocade: The Heart and Lungs of the Network</title>
	<atom:link href="http://havemacwillblog.com/2008/04/22/brocade-the-heart-and-lungs-of-the-network/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://havemacwillblog.com/2008/04/22/brocade-the-heart-and-lungs-of-the-network/</link>
	<description>Oh please, not another Mac bigot</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 13:59:37 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: jason</title>
		<link>http://havemacwillblog.com/2008/04/22/brocade-the-heart-and-lungs-of-the-network/#comment-1363</link>
		<dc:creator>jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Apr 2008 16:27:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://havemacwillblog.com/2008/04/22/brocade-the-heart-and-lungs-of-the-network/#comment-1363</guid>
		<description>So tell me what virtualization and consolidation capabilities does the DCX have besides NPV? They don't support virtual fabrics a t-11 standard. Still one control plane and one data plane, there is no isolation between consolidated san islands. Did you write your article based on a Brocade marketing data-sheet. Where do you get 5-9s reliability? If you lose a CP you lose half the capacity of the box? The box hasnt been shipping for a year and your claiming 5-9s... Come on.... 12 Terabits/sec, great marketing math you have there. Did you forget to mention that using the ICLs between the two chassis is blocking/oversubscribed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So tell me what virtualization and consolidation capabilities does the DCX have besides NPV? They don&#8217;t support virtual fabrics a t-11 standard. Still one control plane and one data plane, there is no isolation between consolidated san islands. Did you write your article based on a Brocade marketing data-sheet. Where do you get 5-9s reliability? If you lose a CP you lose half the capacity of the box? The box hasnt been shipping for a year and your claiming 5-9s&#8230; Come on&#8230;. 12 Terabits/sec, great marketing math you have there. Did you forget to mention that using the ICLs between the two chassis is blocking/oversubscribed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Deepak Munjal</title>
		<link>http://havemacwillblog.com/2008/04/22/brocade-the-heart-and-lungs-of-the-network/#comment-1347</link>
		<dc:creator>Deepak Munjal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:55:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://havemacwillblog.com/2008/04/22/brocade-the-heart-and-lungs-of-the-network/#comment-1347</guid>
		<description>I think both of your articles are correct.  The network will play a greater role as end points become virtualized.  Server, storage, and network assets will all work together to deliver these virtualized services across a unified data center fabric.  The question is which platform will be better able to deliver this vision.  The Cisco Nexus 7000 or the Brocade DCX?

Today there are multiple discrete networks that servers use to communicate to each other and networked storage assets.  As these fabrics converge, the network will be able to offer a single platform to deliver these virtualized services.

To deliver on this unified fabric vision, vendors will need expertise in both Ethernet and Fibre Channel technologies.  Cisco has delivered innovation in both areas with the Catalyst and MDS product lines.

I would argue that Cisco is better positioned to offer this capability with the Nexus 7000 as it leverages Cisco's 20 years of Ethernet experience as well as it's pioneering efforts with FCoE.  Cisco has already begun shipping the Nexus 5000 which is the industry's first FCoE and Data Center Ethernet switch.

Deepak</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think both of your articles are correct.  The network will play a greater role as end points become virtualized.  Server, storage, and network assets will all work together to deliver these virtualized services across a unified data center fabric.  The question is which platform will be better able to deliver this vision.  The Cisco Nexus 7000 or the Brocade DCX?</p>
<p>Today there are multiple discrete networks that servers use to communicate to each other and networked storage assets.  As these fabrics converge, the network will be able to offer a single platform to deliver these virtualized services.</p>
<p>To deliver on this unified fabric vision, vendors will need expertise in both Ethernet and Fibre Channel technologies.  Cisco has delivered innovation in both areas with the Catalyst and MDS product lines.</p>
<p>I would argue that Cisco is better positioned to offer this capability with the Nexus 7000 as it leverages Cisco&#8217;s 20 years of Ethernet experience as well as it&#8217;s pioneering efforts with FCoE.  Cisco has already begun shipping the Nexus 5000 which is the industry&#8217;s first FCoE and Data Center Ethernet switch.</p>
<p>Deepak</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
