Access your Pro+ Content below.
Do we need a network hypervisor for virtualization?
This article is part of the Network Evolution issue of October 2012 Vol 3, No. 5
Today traditional networks are not built to support the scalability required by large-scale server virtualization and the automated provisioning that is required for Infrastructure-as-a-Service models. But new network virtualization methods -- possibly even a network hypervisor -- could change all of that. Today upward of 50% of all servers run as virtual machines. Each one is connected to a virtual network with virtual switches and network adapters that are all created through the server virtualization hypervisor. This wide-scale virtualization will enable service providers and large enterprises to offer Infrastructure-as-a-Service in which companies or groups of users can self-provision virtual machines and network resources on demand with just a few clicks. Ultimately, they'll be able to create mini virtual data centers using these resources. On the server side of this equation, the technology is ready to go, but traditional networks are preventing this flexibility. These networks are burdened with cumbersome physical ...
Access this PRO+ Content for Free!
By submitting your personal information, you agree that TechTarget and its partners may contact you regarding relevant content, products and special offers.
Features in this issue
Software-defined networking could solve the problems that Ethernet and IP networking pose to Network-as-a-Service by centralizing a connection permission policy.
To handle mass server virtualization and Infrastructure-as-a-Service, IT teams need network virtualization with fluid provisioning. Will that require a network hypervisor?
Manual networks stifle the otherwise automated private cloud. Can software defined networking and network virtualization solve the problem?
News in this issue
Network virtualization tool FlowVisor boosts software defined networking by allowing easy slicing of physical networks into multiple logical pieces.
The software-defined networking battle boils down to one basic difference in strategy: open source or proprietary. Which side will win? Maybe neither one.