OpenDaylight Gives Details on Initial SDN Platform

 
 
By Jeffrey Burt  |  Posted 2013-09-15 Email Print this article Print
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


Contributing to the effort were vendors Cisco, IBM, ConteXtream, Ericsson, NEC, Plexxi, Radware and Pantheon. Also contributing were the Industrial Technology Research Institute and University of Kentucky developers Brent Salsibury and Evan Zeller.

The architecture will be shown at what the OpenDaylight Project is calling OpenDaylight Mini-Summits Sept. 18 in New Orleans and Oct. 22 in Edinburgh, Scotland.

SDN is getting a lot of attention from vendors, analysts and journalists alike, but currently—outside of major Web 2.0 companies like Amazon and Google, which tend to be early adopters of technologies that help their massive data centers run more easily and cost-effectively—there are relatively few real-world SDN deployments. However, that will come, probably starting in the fourth quarter, Gartner analyst Mark Fabbi told eWEEK this summer.

"SDN is very real for some of the big cloud providers … guys who are selling big Internet services," Fabbi said.

OpenDaylight is among a number of open efforts around SDN, with others including the Open Networking Foundation (ONF) and the Open Compute Project. Skeptics of the OpenDaylight Project have pointed to these other efforts as part of their criticism. SDN startup Big Switch Networks withdrew from OpenDaylight two months after it was announced, after the project decided to merge the SDN controller technologies from Big Switch and Cisco to create a common controller. Big Switch officials viewed that as an example that OpenDaylight would be driven by big vendors and not by what is best for the industry.

“Thinking about this long and hard, it became clear to us that this isn’t a foundation that we can build on,” Big Switch CEO Guido Appenzeller wrote in a post on his company’s blog in June.

However, in his own post on the OpenDaylight blog the same day, David Meyer, CTO and chief scientist at Brocade and an OpenDaylight board member, said the decision on the controller was a good example of how open-source development should work.

Noting that multiple controller code bases were submitted, Meyer said that “the community looked at the code, weighed the merits of various parts and in typical open-source fashion picked the best pieces from multiple codebases to build the base controller. In the open-source software world, that’s positive forward progress.”

 



 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Submit a Comment

Loading Comments...
 
Manage your Newsletters: Login   Register My Newsletters























 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Thanks for your registration, follow us on our social networks to keep up-to-date
Rocket Fuel