nvchristianacademy.com

First off, virtual servers think they are physical servers and own the entire platform. Each virtual server wants all the bandwidth the physical server can offer, but in the virtual world, bandwidth is a shared service. This has the real potential to create a bottleneck on the network. When 1
car approaches a single lane toll booth, traffic congestion is not a problem. When 100 cars approach this same toll, instant gridlock.

LAS VEGAS–Like last month’s RSA Conference, there is a sufficient amount of hype about virtualization here at Interop. From a marketing perspective, this is to be expected. The industry is ga-ga over virtualization, so everyone is jumping on the bandwagon. Beyond the spin however, server virtualization and networking are two of a kind as foundational technologies in next-generation data centers.

The more virtual servers users implement, the faster we will see a transition to 10 gigabit Ethernet switching in the data center. Given the popularity of VMware and the rise of Citrix XenServer and Microsoft Hyper-V, this year may become a “perfect storm” for this transition.

The other thing to note about virtual servers is that they never stay put. In a virtual data center, VMs are constantly created, replicated, and moved. Networks need to understand these activities so they can continue to filter packets for security and route/switch packets to their end destination.

Here at Interop, lots of folks are saying that networks need to have “virtualization awareness,” and I couldn’t agree more. Citrix, Microsoft, and VMware need to work with Cisco, Extreme, F5, and Juniper to ensure that networks and virtual servers act as an integrated system, not a bunch of unconnected piece parts. This will help users as they build virtual data centers and help vendors sell more stuff. Oh yeah, and it will keep all of us networking geeks in Vegas at Interop each year for the foreseeable future.

Hathaway’s team has 14 days left to create a cybersecurity action plan for the president. That plan, to be presented on April 17, will be a springboard for White House-led cybersecurity plans in the coming years and will put the onus on the White House to direct interagency cybersecurity efforts, said the officials, who declined to be named.

There were also discussions with more than 50 universities about relevant research currently underway and ways in which it could be used to improve the country’s security. About 70 universities collaborated on a report on ways they could contribute to a national cybersecurity effort.

Two officials familiar with the review, led by Melissa Hathaway, the acting senior director for cyberspace for the National Security and Homeland Security Councils, said the laws and policies governing telecommunications have not kept pace with the technology in the sector. Consequently, the administration is reviewing ways to balance the need to address evolving threats–such as viruses or organized cybercrime–with the maintenance of information infrastructure, they said, talking to reporters on a conference call.

After reviewing presidential directives, strategic plans produced by advisory boards, and a host of other cybersecurity documents, the review team identified more than 250 requirements for securing cyberspace that were commonly recognized as critical. The team asked government departments to explain what plans were in place to meet those requirements relevant to their department mission. For instance, the team met with the Social Security Administration and the IRS to discuss their unique role in securing citizens’ personal information and maintaining public trust.

The intersection of military operations and telecommunications policy is just one of the many facets of cybersecurity currently under review by the administration as it wraps up its 60-day, government-wide review of cybersecurity programs.

The government may have to take a new approach to securing the nation’s telecommunications infrastructure, two senior administration officials said Friday.

The review has emphasized the need for privacy and the protection of civil liberties and has included discussions with groups like the American Civil Liberties Union, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and the Center for Democracy and Technology, the administration officials said.

The Obama administration has sought out unprecedented levels of input from government agencies, the private sector, and other organizations, the officials said. In all, the review so far as consisted of more than 40 meetings and has yielded more than 100 papers to inform the final action plan.

The review team is currently conducting a gap analysis to determine how best to coordinate interagency policy from the White House and how to architect cybersecurity efforts like standards in the procurement process.

Monday saw the kickoff of the competition’s Round 1, in which 25 winning proposals announced on September 22 will each be awarded $25,000. The winners of that round will have the option to apply for Round 2, in which five final winners will receive $250,000 to fund the development of their Facebook applications. Winners will also have access to “mentorship” from Facebook as well as a boost in publicity and marketing resources.

Additionally, FBFund has heretofore flown under the radar, unusual for something that has come out of a publicity magnet like Facebook–and some of the moderate press it’s gotten has been fairly negative. Throwing a contest is probably a decent way to drum up some attention.

Developers, start your engines: submissions are now open for the developer application contest that Facebook created for its FBFund grant program. Winning developers, who submit business plans for their prototypical Facebook Platform applications, will receive between $25,000 and $250,000 in grant money. The company plans to give away $10 million total.

The contest was originally detailed at this year’s F8 conference, in which the 10 original FBFund selectees were also unveiled.

Facebook is drawing developer attention to its platform at a crucial time: first, it’s expanded its API to the Facebook Connect initiative; and second, it’s now competing for geek attention not only with rival social-networking platforms but also with Apple’s
iPhone, the hot platform du jour.

This made a lot of sense back in the old days because of network technology limitations and traffic patterns. But alas, network usage and technology have radically changed since then. Network packets carry all sorts of traffic consisting of chatty protocols, voice, and multimedia. As for networking technology, many historical limitations are fading away. Today’s networking devices have superior capabilities in four key areas:

2. Port density
A 24-port access switch can join others in a stackable or virtual configuration. The result? Tons of ports for connectivity.

No, this won’t happen overnight, but the roots are already being planted. Hewlett-Packard has been talking this game for a while and is rapidly becoming a major networking player. Juniper Networks’ entrance into the Ethernet switching market will also accelerate the model. As for Cisco Systems, it has the most to lose but is adjusting its game accordingly. John Chambers & Co. may not want a flat network, but they understand that technology advances are pushing the network in this direction.

3. Performance
Networking equipment combines 10-gigabit Ethernet with incredibly fast system backplanes.

4. Intelligence
Devices can easily combine Layer 2 switching, Layer 3 routing, and a host of other packet processing capabilities.

For the longest time, networks were built in three tiers: access, aggregation, and core.

Over time, these device-centric changes could alter the way we build networks and greatly impact the networking industry. Packet processing and forwarding decisions will be made throughout the network, not at specific aggregation points alone. As this happens, the network could morph into an intelligent flat fabric rather than today’s hierarchical structure.

1. Wireless support
The new 802.11n IEEE standard is a game changer that may eliminate the need for most wired connections.

In other words, it was Icahn, the other half of Microsoft’s joint proposal, who was asking for all Yahoo board members and top management to resign immediately. But even Icahn,
in his letter to shareholders Monday, noted he was willing to discuss keeping some of the Yahoo directors around, and even founder Jerry Yang as “Chief Yahoo.”

Microsoft jumped into the brawl between Yahoo and investor activist Carl Icahn on Monday, issuing a “set-the-record-straight” statement on its rejected sweetened offer for Yahoo’s search business.

Here is the text of Microsoft’s statement:

Microsoft’s proposal did not include changes to Yahoo’s governance.

On the evening of July 12, Yahoo Inc. released a statement relating to recent discussions involving Yahoo, Microsoft Corp., and Carl Icahn. Microsoft believes the statement contains inaccuracies that need to be corrected. Among other things, the enhanced proposal for an alternate search transaction that we submitted late Friday was submitted at the request of Yahoo Chairman Roy Bostock as a result of apparent attempts by Mr. Icahn to have Microsoft and Yahoo engage on a search transaction on terms Mr. Icahn believed Microsoft would be willing to accept and which Microsoft understands Mr. Icahn had discussed with Yahoo.

Microsoft also contends its sweetened offer has been incorrectly portrayed as a “take it or leave it ultimatum,” rather than a “timetable” to push negotiations forward. Yahoo, in its investor presentation, notes that Microsoft gave the company only 24 hours to consider its proposal.

Specifically, on Thursday afternoon, July 10, Mr. Bostock called Steve Ballmer’s office to arrange a call. On that subsequent call, Mr. Bostock told Mr. Ballmer that “with substantial guarantees on the table and an increase in the TAC (traffic acquisition cost) rate, there are the pillars of a search only deal to be done.” Mr. Bostock encouraged Mr. Ballmer to submit a new proposal to Yahoo! for a search-only deal reflecting these terms.

After considering Yahoo’s request and taking into account Yahoo’s previous feedback about our prior search proposal, Microsoft determined late Friday to propose an enhanced search transaction. This proposal included significant revenue guarantees, higher TAC rates, an equity investment and an option for Yahoo to extend the agreement over a 10-year period.

For starters, the software giant’s search-only proposal “did not include changes to Yahoo’s governance.”

At the time Microsoft submitted its enhanced proposal, Microsoft asked that Yahoo confirm whether it would agree that the enhancements were sufficient to form the basis for the parties to engage in negotiations over the weekend on a letter of intent and more detailed term sheets. This discussion has been mischaracterized as a take it or leave it ultimatum, rather than a timetable in order to move forward to intensive negotiations. Yahoo informed Microsoft on Saturday that it had rejected the proposal.

Google is introducing video into Google Apps with the hope that companies will be attracted to a service that helps with training and internal communication but also removes the hassles of hosting video.

The service will be wrapped inside the Google Apps Premier Edition which costs $50 a year per user. For that price, each user receives all the Google Apps, such as Gmail, Docs, and Calendar.

Glotzbach said Google has an opportunity to cash in on corporate video, a segment that many predicted would one day be huge but has been too complicated and costly for wide adoption. For Gmail, the company offers 25GB per mailbox. For Google Video, the company offers 3GB per user.

According to Google executives who spoke to CNET News last week, the search giant has tailored some of the technology developed by YouTube specifically for corporate clients. The offering is part of Google’s continuing efforts to replace traditional office software with so-called cloud-computing services.

A demo video provided to reporters illustrated the ways that Google employees use the service, which goes live to the public on Tuesday.

Some of the service’s other features enable administrators to track usage, and employees can leave comments, insert tags, and embed a video into any Web page. Companies control who sees the video because only authorized users are able to watch.

With the help of Google Video for Business, a company’s employees can upload and share clips with the same ease as posting a clip to YouTube, according to Matt Glotzbach, Google’s product manager director.

The coolest feature by far is the Scene Browser, which presents a series of thumbnails that a user can click on to locate a specific segment within a video. It’s slick and one has to wonder why it isn’t offered on YouTube. Glotzbach said he didn’t know for certain but speculated that it might be because YouTube’s clips are generally shorter in length.

One Google executive said during the demo that instead of distributing an e-mail with a wrap-up of quarterly results to his team, he posted a clip of himself discussing the quarter. It was more personable than just sending an e-mail “especially for Google employees that work in remote offices” the video’s narrator said.

Google is hoping that companies will flock to a service that doesn’t require them to host servers or worry about huge amounts of data. This is a bottom’s up approach, according to Glotzbach. It used to be that companies were willing only to pay for high-level executives to make videos for internal communication, but Google Video for Business enables a company to allow employees at any level to distribute video content.

“Think of this as user-generated video for businesses,” Glotzbach said.

The receiver manufacturers have so loaded up their midprice receivers they killed the market for the upper-end models. I think that’s great. Before they wise up, take advantage of their stupidity.

Thing is, I just reviewed three high-end receivers for a magazine, and I do think they sound a wee bit better than the lower-price alternatives. We’re not talking day and night differences here, so I’ll pretty much guarantee adding an extra $1,000 to your speaker budget will deliver much better sound. So instead of buying a $1,700 A/V receiver–and (for example) a $1,500 sat/sub package–get a $700 receiver and a $2,500 sat/sub package. Total cost will be the same, but the sound will be way better with better speakers and/or sub.

Are high-end A/V receivers, which for the purpose of this blog is any receiver with a MSRP over $1,500, worth it? True, they’re loaded with features, stuff like all of the latest surround formats like Dolby TrueHD and DTS Master Audio. But wait a sec–Denon’s soon to be released $649 AVR-1909 receiver has them, too. It’s got three HDMI inputs and all of the latest Audyssey auto speaker set up and equalization doodads.

Denon AVR-1909–why pay more?

Let’s take a look at Sony’s $1,699 STR-DA5300ES. What does the extra $1,000 buy you? Not so much. Faroudja DCDi Cinema Technology, great. Video sources connected via composite, S-video and component cables get bumped up to a 1080p over HDMI. The Sony is rated to deliver 120 watts per channel versus the Denon’s 90 per. Oh, and it boasts six HDMI inputs. That’s cool, and I’m probably overlooking some details, but does that sound like it’s worth an extra $1,000-plus?

That is, until the open-source neighbors moved in. As noted in a Gartner analysis from late last year, proprietary software is on the wane within enterprises while open source is gaining:

Consider the following responses to the question, “How has open-source software met your organization’s expectations in the following areas?”:

Follow me on Twitter @mjasay.

Open-source software isn’t perfect, and its quality varies widely, just as in the proprietary-software world. But unlike proprietary software, open source actively de-risks the IT purchasing decision by enabling you to try before you buy, buy on subscription (i.e., no long-term commitment), and pay a lot less for equal or greater value.

That’s not the sort of chart that Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer likes to wake up to, but it’s a message to which CIOs are increasingly warming.

Open source gaining at proprietary's expense

Small wonder, then, that CIOs are voting with their wallets, buying into open source while cutting investments in proprietary software.

Reduced costs…87 percent (met or exceeded expectations).
Improved quality…92 percent.
Eased integration and customization…86 percent.
Quickened the pace of innovation…82 percent.
Improved support…84 percent.
Standards compliance…91 percent.
Decreased time to market…82 percent.

(Credit:
Gartner)

commentary

It used to be so easy to be a proprietary-software vendor.

The reason? Well, cost is the primary driver for open-source consideration, as a recent Forrester report suggests, but what is most significant is the overwhelmingly positive experience CIOs are having with open source, as this same Forrester report suggests.

These are numbers that money can’t buy. In fact, the open-source world is giving them away…literally.

I got my hands on a CardScan Personal review unit and set up the system in no time. I installed the software, calibrated the scanner using the included blank card, and chose a location for the program data. I then started feeding the scanner with a series of cards I’d picked up at various parties, networking events, and conferences over the past year. Sadly, the scanner’s small size means you have to feed the cards through one-by-one–which is a drag if you try to catch up on hundreds of cards at once like I did.

Priced at $169, the CardScan Personal isn’t cheap. But if you have a stack of cards sitting on your desk–and especially if you’re in an industry where contacts equal money–the easy-to-use CardScan Personal will be worth that cost.

Once the contacts are in, you can automatically sync the information to your primary management software–including Outlook, Windows Mobile, and Palm Desktop–or you can export the records in a variety of formats for use by other applications. CardScan provides free online backup of your data, which also lets you look up your contacts via a secure Web site.

The results were less surefire when it came to cards with color backgrounds, photos, or non-Roman characters. These types of cards will doubtlessly require manual correction. Fortunately, CardScan includes a “verified” check box on each record so you can tell instantly whether a record has been confirmed by a human as being accurate. Checking the information can be a little tedious, but it’s still easier than typing all the contacts in yourself.

The following product is available:

On Sale Now: $133.62 - $218.39
View the latest prices for CardScan Personal V8 - sheetfed scanner

The software’s optical character recognition, which interprets the information on the cards, was impressive, if not quite perfect. It read the most straightforward cards with no problem. It even cleanly interpreted one card that was crowded with text and had the contact’s name at the bottom instead of near the top. The scanner also was not thrown off by some handwritten scribbles on the front of several cards.

CardScan Personal is a compact business card scanner paired with powerful (though Windows-only) contact management software that makes short work of transforming a stack of business cards into useful information.

The CardScan software saves an image of the card with the contact file, so you always have a visual record (helpful for confirming data or just jogging your memory of a person). You can assign categories, labels, and notes to individual cards or to whole batches of cards that you scan at once. For example, as I scanned several dozen cards from last month’s Twiistup party, I assigned tags to the whole batch with one click.

The 7.6-ounce scanner measures 4.8 inches wide, 3.3 inches deep, and 1.5 inch high, so it won’t take up much room in your bag. (The device even comes with a carrying pouch that keeps the scanner and USB cable together.) According to the company, the CardScan can scan a monochrome card in 5 seconds and a polychrome card in a few more seconds. That’s a decent speed, however, the real value comes with the accompanying software. The software not only helps import the information from the cards but is also useful as a standalone contact manager.

(Credit:
CardScan)

My hunch is that this concept is going to continue to gain popularity, especially given the ongoing advances in “cloud storage.” By the way, MokaFive is already out with software that lets you fit an operating system and application stack on a USB iflash device. U3 also gained attention a couple of years ago. Kate Purmal, the former president of the company, is now a VP at SanDisk. There are a few others that I can’t think of right at this moment.

The product, developed in conjunction with Check Point, lets you copy a protected version of your apps and then plug into any client machine. When you’re done, the “virtualized” version of your desktop disappears after logging out.

DHS has requested $192 million to spend on cyberdefense in the next fiscal year, up from the current $115 million. Given the other budgetary demands related to digital security, that doesn’t leave a lot of shekels to foster public education. The implicit message is that Uncle Sam is waiting for the private sector to pick up the tab. I suppose it’s just as well that individual companies fill the breach before they suffer the Big One.

It’s fashionable to dismiss trade shows as so 1998, but there’s usually always something that makes it worthwhile if you look hard enough. So it was, the coolest thing I saw at the RSA 2008 conference this week was a prototype portable virtualization technology that SanDisk will begin selling in the second half of the year.

Schmidt’s right but we’re a long way from attaching DefCon 1 importance to the topic. I could go on for another 1,000 words enumerating the why’s and wherefore’s but suffice to say that society has been lulled into a false sense of assurance about digital security. Maybe it will take a concerted cyberattack to shake that lethargy. (Estonian government and business Web sites last year suffered denial-of-service attacks protesting the move of a World War II statue in Estonia. Meanwhile, the Arabs and the Israelis have been engaged in low-level cyber skirmishing for several years.) John Thompson of Symantec drew an analogy with the Smokey Bear campaign in the 1960s and 1970s, when the government sought to reduce forest fires through public education. Clearly, he said, it had had an impact.

“And now you have critical business and government information exposed, and people realize there’s an underground economy involved in trading stolen data,” Thompson told me. “Also, you have nation states (digitally) attacking each other for competitive edge in a global economy. And so the government realizes that now is the time to act. But when you talk about best practices and thinking holistically, or extending responsibility to more than just the IT heads, that’s not new.”

Shwed and others say it’s a matter of enforcing best practices. When Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff spoke on Monday, he pounded away at that theme. I heard the same thing from Howard Schmidt, who previously served as vice chair of the president’s Critical Infrastructure Protection Board and as the special adviser for cyberspace security for the White House.

Secure and protected. I can’t tell you how many times I heard that line walking the show floor or in meetings the last couple of days. It’s a great tech cliche these days. The rub is that no matter how good the technology offered by Check Point or any other security provider, we remain creatures of habit–and when it comes to security, bad habits, mostly. Every security expert I spoke with agreed that your typical computer user inadvertently functions as the bad guys’ best friend. That was the other takeaway from the conference. Security professionals are at wit’s end when it comes to persuading the rank-and-file to do the right thing.

When I met up with Check Point Software’s CEO Gil Shwed to talk about the SanDisk relationship as well as the wider security arena, he was predictably upbeat in describing another advance in safeguarding portable data. But, he added, the ultimate success depends upon guaranteeing that the information will be “secure and protected.”

“The (best practices) concept is good but it’s gotta be in your face,” said Schmidt, now heading his own consultancy, R & H Security Consulting.

(Credit:
Charles Cooper/CNET News.com)

Howard Schmidt, R & H Security Consulting