Well Steve you made a good educated guess by naming Netsys, Cisco just announced it's intentions:
SAN JOSE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 14, 1996--Cisco
Systems, Inc. today announced it has signed a definitive agreement to
acquire privately held Netsys Technologies through a stock purchase.
Why have a R&D dept. When you can just aquire technology. Cisco are making great tracks in the Networking world, over 80% of the Internet is made up of Cisco kit. I am just a engineer but Cisco is the best product by far. People like to make noise about new products being developed by Cisco's competition but ask any IT manager if the already have a $500,000 doller network made up of almost one companys product there is now way they will try new things. In the real world differant products from differant comapanys in the router/switching buisness do not mix well. People are asking questions about new features like implementing RSVP, TAG Switching, Packet Encryption all these are features being added and developed for the Internet by Cisco, Bay and 3Com. Cisco already has the biggest foot in door so it has this huge headstart.
In response to Cisco domination Bay, 3COM and IBM have got together to create the NIA.
The best description I read was from Nick Lipps:
This past May, Cisco's top three challengers (3Com, Bay
Networks and IBM) erected a roadblock in the path of the
Cisco steamroller by forming the Network Interoperability
Alliance (NIA). Xylan is the latest member to join the
group, with more to follow as the alliance picks up steam.
What is NIA? NIA is an endorsement of a set of pre-existing
standards, combined with independent conformance testing of
these standards. NIA proposes a simple network architecture
framework of low-cost, simple network devices at the desktop
and workgroup, with more functionality and complexity
centralized at the backbone and campus levels of the network.
It also defines common network management applications and
agents among alliance vendors.
NIA promises to deliver a framework made up of four parts:
1) Desktops and servers. These "end nodes" in the network
will become more intelligent by adding special capabilities
such as quality of service (QoS) and network management
features to NIA members' NICs, drivers, hub ports and
switches. This is where the combined muscle of IBM, 3Com and
Bay Networks comes into play, since these three vendors
control over one-third of the nearly 200 million network
connections (NICs plus hub and switch ports). Cisco weighs
in with a paltry 1% share overall, but is nearly neck-and-
neck with 3Com in shipping switch ports -- the largest
growing segment of the computer connection market.
2) "Edge" networking. NIA's wish is to provide low-cost,
effective networking at the network periphery via standards
for switching, switching with routing, short-cut routing via
zero hop routing protocol and QoS.
3) Core networking. At the center of the network, NIA
proposes to support existing backbone routers and routing
protocols, such as OSPF. In addition, it will make use of
ATM Forum standards LANE and Bay Networks' technology called
I-PNNI (Integrated Private Network-to-Network Interface). I-
PNNI provides a single, network-wide topology or view of
routers, frame switches and cell switches. I-PNNI would
become the backbone protocol in NIA's architecture, much like
IGRP is the backbone protocol within Cisco's routers.
4) Network management. The vision is for NIA vendors'
management applications to monitor each others' products. To
accomplish this, NIA promises to align existing enterprise
MIBs, promote the development and standardization of MIBs for
new features and functions, foster development of Java tools
for network management and jointly develop a topology
protocol.
For example, today, only Bay Networks has a topology protocol
which allows its management applications to view the entire
network from behind router ports into switches, hubs and
desktops. By adopting this topology protocol, NIA members'
suite of network management applications (e.g. Optivity,
Transcend or NetView) could provide detailed views of the
shared, switched and routed infrastructure -- allowing
network managers to finally see and measure their entire
network infrastructure. If NIA is successful on this piece
of the architecture alone, it will move the industry a giant
step forward.
The Soul of NIA
So what's in NIA for its member vendors? Multi-billion
dollar site, campus and backbone networks are on the line
here. What NIA is attempting to do is to level the playing
field and tilt the balance of power away from Cisco. In
short, NIA is aimed at putting a stake in IOS' heart by
developing an "open IOS" which its members hope will lure
customers away from Cisco and into their camp. NIA is
approaching this by attacking Cisco's weak spot: desktop
connections. Hence, its inclusion of smart desktop and server
connections in its architecture.
Will NIA Succeed?
Although this motherhood, apple pie and open standards talk
sounds good, we've heard this pitch ad nauseam (without much
substance to follow or gold stars to point to). As it stands
now, I believe NIA is doomed if it gets entrenched in an
anti-Cisco posture. It's too reminiscent of the Open System
Foundation (OSF) which was clearly aimed at Sun's leadership
in distributed processing and its large share of the UNIX
market. OSF also had a multivendor, interoperability and
portability spin to it, but in the end, customers chose to
stay with proprietary implementations from Sun and others.
For all of the hand-waving, few vendors ever really adopted
OSF technology -- most gave it lip service and hedged their
bets with their own propriety implementations.
A lot of work must be done in switched enterprise
internetworking standards. NIA has taken a novel approach to
standardization by choosing existing technologies -- some
from the ATM Forum, some from the IEEE, some from the IETF
and others from members' own internal development. There is
no precedent in the industry for success with such a broad
range of technologies. The most triumphant efforts have
focused on a single technology rather than an architecture or
overall approach to computer networking.
The four most laudable standards efforts our industry has
seen are the IETF, IEEE, Frame Relay Forum and ATM Forum.
The IETF and IEEE are official standards bodies. The Frame
Relay and ATM Forums each accomplished its goal of setting
standards for one emerging technology. Both of these forums
started with only four vendors and were chartered to move
technology into the market quickly. In fact, these forums
were doing pre-standards work so that when proposals got to
the IEEE or IETF, the standard was essentially rubber
stamped.
To prevail, NIA must become the IETF for switched enterprise
internets. In this model, the technology selection process
is open -- not pre-selected -- with the market choosing
winners and losers. NIA should take the IETF approach to
standards building/setting by organizing working groups
around technologies where contributions are open to the
industry at large.
Secondly, NIA must enlarge its pool of vendor expertise and
also include user representation as well. For example, to
deliver true QoS between desktops and servers Microsoft,
Netscape, Novell and Sun must come on board and offer up key
technologies such as links into Winsoc 2 and Java. The goal
is to ensure that no one firm dominates and that it is
managed as a truly independent entity that is open to the
industry.
Thirdly, getting an independent interoperability lab
established post-haste will go a long way to putting money
where NIA's mouth is by demonstrating the real goal of this
alliance: multivendor interoperability. This lab should
brand an NIA logo that can be affixed to products showing its
conformance to NIA interoperability standards. These
accomplishments should be demonstrated at all major trade
shows such as NetWorld+Interop.
NIA's Impact
So, will NIA slow down the Cisco steamroller? Clearly not in
1996. But if NIA members are able to compete and lead with
NIA on the sales front and if sales has hard facts to back up
their interoperability and performance claims then, yes, NIA
will impact Cisco's growth. NIA may not take market share
away from Cisco, but it might slow it down a few percentage
points.
This could be the relief and credibility that Bay needs to
further develop its open internetworking story and move off
its current next-hot-box corporate strategy. For 3Com, NIA
will showcase that it is indeed an enterprise networking
systems vendor. In IBM's case, NIA will demonstrate that it
can influence the internetworking industry -- giving it some
regained confidence and notoriety to carry into its next
endeavor.
More information on Strategic Networks Consulting is
available via the World Wide Web at snci.com |
