When iSCSI was finally made to work, I thought it was a great idea and a
terrific technological achievement, but I was still sceptical. My attitude was
that iSCSI wasn’t sufficiently better than Fibre Channel to stand a chance of
displacing it.
The fact is that any company that needs a SAN almost certainly has one
already – and it’s probably based on Fibre Channel. As for those organisations
that don’t already have a SAN, it is probably because they can do what they need
to do with networked storage perfectly well using other technology.
Look at the NAS market, for instance. Several leading NAS vendors, including
EMC, NetApp and Adaptec’s Snap Appliance division have added iSCSI capabilities
to their filers. Are buyers actually using the iSCSI feature, or is it just a
tick-list item when they’re deciding which NAS box to choose? My guess is that
it’ll be the latter – at least until more mainstream applications require the
block-based access to data that iSCSI and other SANs provide.
Certainly, some firms that didn’t already have a SAN will decide they need
one, and will take the iSCSI path; others will even use iSCSI to extend the
reach of an existing Fibre Channel-based SAN.
Various forms of IP storage are also beginning to score in storage extension
– the SAN over WAN concept that I like to think of as a SWAN, but which IP
zealots would probably consider to be an ugly duckling. Whichever nomenclature
you prefer, technology to link SANs together over a WAN is finally becoming
mainstream. To begin with it was pretty specialist, then the big SAN players
came on board – Brocade and Cisco with FCIP offerings, McData buying iFCP
pioneer Nishan Systems – and it started to look practical.
Now it’s the turn of the WAN companies. Among the new products at this year’s
Storage Networking World Europe, for example, were SAN over Ethernet extenders
from Nortel and PacketLight – both companies that are perhaps better known for
other forms of WAN cleverness.
It’s interesting to note though that what they’re doing here involves linking
Fibre Channel SANs via a long-distance Ethernet service provided by a telco,
with no iSCSI in sight. So it still appears that, for the bulk of the market,
iSCSI remains an answer in search of a question.
‹ network@bryanbetts.com
Do you agree?
Have your say on this article