Industry watchers like me have long wondered when Cisco will transform itself into a full-line IT infrastructure vendor. This strategy was tipped in 2009 as Cisco barged into the server market with UCS. But one leg of the stool is still missing: Storage remains the province of Cisco partners like EMC and NetApp.
The Rack Endgame
I recently wrote about “The Rack Endgame”, a serious challenge to the enterprise storage status quo in which the current datacenter architecture with centralized networked storage arrays is blown apart by virtualization and distributed storage. It’s worthwhile to read that whole series, but here it is in a nutshell, with special focus on Cisco.
Here’s the Rack Endgame series:
Enterprise storage arrays appeared in the 1990’s as multitudes of smaller computers began to invade the enterprise datacenter. It made sense to centralize storage on a network in the heterogeneous computing environments of the time, and this architecture continues to this day. Both industry stalwarts and scrappy upstarts are focused on building “Jack of all trades” storage arrays that offer performance, capacity, and data management features.
But “do-it-all” arrays are seriously limited at the extremes. They will never offer the performance or scalability of specialized solutions. For this, we need a new dual-system architecture that brings fast flash close to the CPU and keeps scalable capacity at a distance.
This was impractical until now because such a solution would require specialized software running on every connected server. But the advent of virtualization makes it not just possible but downright likely! Already, VMware VSAN can intelligently locate data according to performance and capacity needs. And companies like PernixData and Infinio are building caching solutions that could turn into real storage virtualization layers in the future.
The Evolution of Cisco UCS
Cisco UCS was born into this environment. UCS was designed primarily to be a homogenous compute platform for the enterprise. All of the design decisions that went into “Project California” pointed to a future where server hardware was a universal blank slate for semi-portable (dare we say “containerized”?) operating system images. This is why UCS blades have no “personality” but what is defined at run-time by the UCS manager.
And UCS has been wildly successful. Although established companies like Dell and HP remain strong, UCS has become the standard-bearer for modern server hardware. It is the MacBook to the PC laptop world. And Cisco keeps innovating, with a UCS Mini and modular M-Series announced this month.
Until recently, Cisco has had no real storage solution. Apart from internal drive bays and PCIe flash cards, UCS required an enterprise storage array to function. But Cisco’s acquisition of Whiptail (now called Invicta) was a quiet step in a new direction.
Invicta gives Cisco a top-of-rack flash solution very much along the lines I described in my Rack Endgame article. It’s very fast but not all that scalable; a turbocharger, not an engine. This, and the fact that it’s not yet ready for production use, has led many to wonder what Cisco is up to. But I believe their plan was tipped at the recent UCS Grand Slam event.
Along with the UCS Mini and M-Series, Cisco introduced the fourth-generation UCS servers. And one in particular caught my eye: The UCS C3160 is a “Rack Storage Server” with two processors and up to 360 TB of hard disk storage in 4U. Cisco suggests that the C3160 could be used in media and analytics applications, but I see it differently.
The All-Cisco Rack
Imagine a rack of Cisco UCS servers – they could be B-Series blade servers, C-Series rack servers or M-Series modular servers. Now slap an Invicta flash unit on the top and a C3160 on the bottom, along with some Nexus switches for connectivity. Suddenly we have an all-Cisco rack!
This do-it-all rack could be used for VMware vSphere, with VSAN deciding whether to put data on the Invicta or ESX-running C3160. UCS-loving SimpliVity would be a perfect fit, too. It could run OpenStack or CloudStack, with the C3160 running Swift or Ceph. Or maybe the C3160 runs NexentaStor or Microsoft Windows Server!
Cisco would surely be happy with any such configuration, but I doubt EMC would be pleased. After all, UCS and Nexus make up “the other half” of the vBlocks offered by joint venture VCE. Once an all-Cisco rack is ready for production, why would Cisco spend much effort promoting cross-company solutions when they can keep all the money in-house?
Stephen’s Stance
The all-Cisco rack doesn’t mean EMC, NetApp, or even VCE is doomed. But a robust converged hardware offering from Cisco would challenge them just like UCS in the server space. And it’s clever, too, since Cisco still has plausible deniability. They can reassure EMC that the C3160 is just another UCS server and Foskett (and the customers) are inventing competition where none is intended. But the gloves will come off as soon as Cisco brings in-house a storage platform or converged compute software to run on this all-Cisco rack. Will it be Nexenta? SimpliVity? Or perhaps a homegrown offering leveraging OpenStack? Time will tell!
Rich says
Interesting. When I first saw the C3160, I thought of Sun’s Thumper http://youtu.be/-zQ5RLAyA7w Note Andreas; recently of Arista and now DSSD fame
Justin Warren says
Cisco’s partnership with SimpliVity could well be the first step towards an acquisition. Testing things out to see if it’ll work.
Paul_P says
But haven’t Cisco just withdrawn the Invicta due to scalability & quality issues ? They should have bought Nimble and had done with it.
sfoskett says
Yes! The C3160 totally reminds me of the Thumper, but I didn’t want to get TOO obscure in my storage industry references! Hahaha!
John says
Whiptail was cheap (less than 500 million).
Nimble’s Market Cap is almost 2 Billion. I’d argue a hyperconverged player would have been better (Nutanix, Simplivity, Nimboxx) but with Nutanix’s valuation on the last round they also have no where to go but IPO.
John says
The Thumper combineed with ZFS and OpenSolaris. Combining smart storage software with “dumb” hardware. Like the thin client, and network is the computer, SUN was so far ahead of their time…
stu says
All server players must have storage options – Cisco’s C3160 catches up with what Dell C-class and HP SL-class have been doing for a while now. For Cisco to continue its growth of UCS, they should expand the server-based storage options with more flash and advanced software to build a Server SAN/hyperconverged solution. It is a balance to expand without stepping too much on the storage partnerships that drive a large majority of UCS sales; while Cisco isn’t as good as IBM at “coopetition”, they have a long history of still partnering with those that they compete with. Since Cisco isn’t part of VMware’s EVO:RAIL (while EMC, a storage vendor, will be offering this server-based solution) program and likely will not be part of EVO:RACK, they will need to have an answer for this growing category.
Dheeraj Pandey says
The reference to Thumper makes me nostalgic! Kealia Systems, Andy Bechtolsheim, Greenplum, …
In this case, Cisco got it wrong with such a compute-storage ratio. They should simply try to build good rack-mount servers for computing.
Gabriel Chapman says
baby steps.