This week the Packet Pushers traveled to sunny Silicon Valley to drink from the firehose that is Networking Field Day (NFD).
NFD is one of several events put on by Stephen Foskett of Tech Field Day. NFD brings together tech bloggers and writers for an intense few days of briefings from IT vendors and startups.
For NFD 11, we had presentations from:
- Big Switch Networks
- Cisco
- Citrix
- Dell
- NetScout
- Silverpeak
- Skyport Systems
One great aspect of the Field Day events is that the presentations are streamed live, and then made available on YouTube and Vimeo, so you get to see everything we saw.
Presentations tend to follow a similar format: a short introduction to the company and its technology, and some marketing perspective to provide context about what problems the technology is trying to solve.
Next comes a detailed breakdown of the product or service. Field Day delegates ask questions throughout, and the discussions can be very interactive and informative.
Last comes a product demo, with more opportunities for questions.
The presentations are very useful if you want to catch up on what a vendor is up to, if you’re in the market for a specific product, or you want to get details on a technology sector.
In this roundtable discussion, the Packet Pushers lead a conversation about how the NFD11 presentations we saw might actually impact our networks. We have an open discussion in three parts, considering security, core, and WAN architectures.
- Do you think that banking on security HARDWARE makes sense in a world where workloads are both virtual and mobile?
- Do you have to detect breaches immediately? Or do you think if you pick up the problem after a few days, that s acceptable to the business? Or does that depend on exfiltration of data?
- DC class switches with a Linux kernel as the base are showing up increasingly. What objections do you have to putting these in your core?
- SD-WAN vs. WAN optimization. Used to be, you just bought a Riverbed for WAN op. Does SD-WAN change your thinking?
- WAN tech is increasingly proprietary, even if based on standard technologies. Are we okay with this?