VBN Killed The Branch-In-A-Box

In 1979 The Buggles released their debut single, 'Video Killed The Radio Star,' a nostalgic look at radio from the perspective of the video age that killed it.

Progress drives on, looking nostalgically in the rear view mirror from time to time, but propelled forward by the engine of our insatiable desire for something better.

Tube-based table radios are nostalgic. So are rotary phones, wooden plows, and iron clad ships. Doesn't mean we want to use them anymore. They were abandoned because something better came along. Something easier to use. Faster.Less expensive.

Technology transitions happen all the time in enterprise IT, but the branch office and fixed teleworker seem to have been neglected along the way. And what an oversight it was. Today more than 85% of employees work outside of the primary corporate campus. Yet they need - but haven't had - the same access to corporate network resources and applications as someone in the home office.

The solution cobbled together by router vendors was to remotely replicate the infrastructure that's on the corporate campus. That is, assemble a stack of appliances for security, VPN, Wi-Fi, routing - and then try to integrate them to work together.

Over time the separate appliances morphed into an integrated branch-in-a-box router. But experience showed that while you can morph a router from a hairball, but you can never take the hairball out of the router. From the user's point of view, the solution was little improved.

The fundamental problem is that the campus network and its branch offspring were designed assuming static users sitting behind protective firewalls. Mobility - mobile users specifically - breaks that model. You have to punch holes in firewalls, configure complex VLAN assignments for segmenting traffic and user types, install VPNs to protect roaming users. The list goes on and on. And grows more expensive, complex, and user unfriendly as it does.

Virtual Branch Networking (VBN) 1.0 was introduced in 2009 as a ground-up, mobility focused solution. VBN made it less expensive and simpler to securely connect remote users with the enterprise network at low cost and without changing the user experience.

VBN 2.0 goes one giant step farther by leveraging cloud services to do the job done by branch routers today - application acceleration, content security, remote access. Only it does so using a lower cost, more scalable solution that delivers a consistent user experience regardless of where you work: in the corporate HQ, in a branch office, from home, or on the road.

The cloud provides a massively scalable, economical way of delivering services and applications. It has changed the way we transfer data, download files, and use applications. When applied to branch networks, cloud services are the perfect tonic. They deliver essential business-critical services, without complexity, to widely distributed users at less than half the cost of the branch in-a-box router. This is one change you'll make and never, ever look back.

In my mind and in my branch,
We can't rewind it bought the ranch,
VBN killed the branch-in-a-box.

Read more about VBN 2.0 on-line.

Companies That Can't Innovate Replicate...Or Just Whine

A funny thing happened while Aruba was on the way to market with its innovative Virtual Branch Network (VBN) solution and "network rightsizing" initiative - Cisco got hot and bothered.

Just after the VBN solution received the 2009 Best of Interop Las Vegas Award in the Wireless & Mobility category (http://bit.ly/aUocV), Joel Conover, senior manager, network systems at Cisco called the new 600 Series Branch Office Controller "a travesty" (http://bit.ly/KOmNv). He then claimed that Cisco offered the same capabilities with a new product...but only when used behind an expensive Cisco 800 Series ISR Router. Why does Cisco need an expensive WAN router when Aruba VBN does not, even for the entry level $99 list RAP-2?

Aruba's rightsizing initiative promotes the use of Wi-Fi everywhere it can be used, wired networks only where they must be used. Rightsizing is a three step process whereby users assess current wired LAN utilization using a tool like StatSeeker (on average 30-40% of wired ports aren't used at all), consolidate switches and scale service plans/cooling/power consumption to match, and then invest the savings in upgrading the Wi-Fi network to 802.11n. Simple and logical, right? If you can save money you should. If your network is already rightsizied then the most you've invested is some time verifying that's the case.

Customer reaction to rightsizing has been nothing short of amazing. The California State University System identified $30M of savings by shifting from wired networks to Wi-Fi (http://bit.ly/uvjbu).

Cisco, however, had a different reaction.When John Cox published an article in Network World titled "Is it time to cut the Ethernet access cable?" (http://bit.ly/3cG4t) in which he noted that pervasive WLANs leave costly wired ports idle, Cisco flipped. Chris Kozup, ironically titled senior manager for mobility solutions at Cisco, maintained that an Ethernet cable is exactly what everyone needs. Aruba's right-sizing is a "shortsighted message from a wireless-only provider. It's penny-wise and pound-foolish." Using Wi-Fi as the primary form of network access is inflexible and the benefits exaggerated, he said.

And yet....Cisco itself released a report stating that its own employees average 90 minutes per day of additional productive time using Wi-Fi (http://bit.ly/UNHQd). So why is Cisco so aggressively pushing wired LANs on customers?

The answer to both questions can be found in Cisco's business model, which depends on profits generated from selling overpriced wired routers and wired ports. The big R&D bucks go to the wired side of the house, which is perhaps one reason why Cisco's lackluster wireless LANs are missing innovative features like application awareness and adaptive response to changes in local RF conditions.

Cisco's focus on wired LANs and lack of wireless innovation has resulted in two consistent forms of behavior: attempts to replicate features found in Aruba's innovative products (Cisco's new band steering feature and the changes in their newest network management console appear to be almost exact replicas of Aruba features); and whining, as exemplified in the articles above.

If you want real innovation, look to companies that identify problems and deliver creative solutions. Replicators and whiners need not apply.