Daily Network Monitor

In a recent issue of Network World’s Network/Systems Management Newsletter, Andi Mann wrote:

Two weeks ago, Dell announced a new Unified Manageability Architecture (UMA), which it described as “a blueprint to standardize systems management.” Future versions of Dell’s OpenManage solutions will be co-developed with systems management solution provider Altiris, built on the Altiris Notification Server. Dell will leverage Altiris’ management platform to offer a single hardware and software management console.

However, even though the console is built around technology from a proprietary management vendor, it will use open standards such as CIM, SMI-S, and WS-Man. ….Then last week, the Distributed Management Task Force (DMTF), announced a number of new standards aimed at boosting interoperability. These included a newly ratified WS-CIM specification, a Web services-based version of the DMTF’s Common Information Model (CIM), an open standard for interoperable exchange of management information; a revised version of SMBIOS, an open standard for interoperable exchange of motherboard and system information; and the public release of the complete open standard, Systems Management Architecture for Server Hardware (SMASH), V1.0.

The DMTF is an industry body with nearly 200 member organizations, including the who’s who of enterprise management – Altiris, Avocent, BMC, CA, Cisco, Dell, EMC, Fujitsu, HP, Hitachi, IBM, Intel, LANDesk, Microsoft, Novell, Oracle, Sun, and Symantec. Yet despite a membership consisting predominantly of proprietary vendors, it is probably the leading proponent of open standards to promote interoperability in enterprise management.

…More and more vendors are going to develop and build to open standards like UMA, SMASH, and WS-Man. Those that do not are likely to be left in the scrap heap, regardless of whether they are open source or proprietary.

Yet there is still a problem – competing “open” standards. When too many standards compete, it really does not matter how open they are, it still creates complexity, and works against interoperability. Therefore, in the end, customers still need to choose a limited number of suppliers. Regardless of how interoperable these so-called “open standard” suppliers are, it is the best way to reduce IT management complexity.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, January 9th, 2007 at 8:35 am and is filed under Corporate Foibles, Network Management. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.