Open Souce Network Operating Systems
hugo at slabnet.com
Wed Jan 17 23:48:47 UTC 2018
On Wed 2018-Jan-17 23:11:14 +0000, Matthew Smee <matthew.smee at sydney.edu.au> wrote:
>Yeah, it'd be silly for organisations to try and standardise their environments for services or infrastructure.
I'm somewhat in two minds there. Options to tackle operational
Option 1: Require a homogeneous environment or minimize vendors/platforms
as much as possible.
Option 2: Accept vendor/platform diversity as inevitable and build
systems/abstractions around that.
Is #1 achievable? If you're expending time/effort/resources achieving #1
and fall short, don't you have to do #2 anyway?
Much has also been said on monocultures in infrastructure: having a single
bug impact all of your gear sucks. If I can manage a pair of border
routers, for instance, from two different vendors in an
abstracted/consistent enough manner that I don't deal with their
idiosyncrasies on a daily basis, am I not better off than running a single
platform / code train in that function?
Hugo Slabbert | email, xmpp/jabber: hugo at slabnet.com
pgp key: B178313E | also on Signal
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the NANOG