In the landscape of network management, there are interesting dynamics taking place. For a number of IT managers, they are finding that network management is more easily conducted that storage management. It would seem that storage management and monitoring would be very similar to network management and monitoring; yet it seems the two are very different, one much more challenging than the other.
The current landscape was examined in this article, referring to improvements in this space as not necessarily making things better – just different. Part of what is leading the discomfort is the standards processes that are leading both areas, which vary in their own right.
Network management standards processes are greatly controlled by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). This standards body includes worldwide participation from a number of communities, including research and user communities. In addition, network management is much simpler as the number of vendors that make up the networking equipment space is small compared to that of the storage space.
Unfortunately, for those operating in the storage space, the storage rack is far more complex, thanks in part to the standards process. As there are 7 OSI layers, there are also multiple standards bodies that control the equivalent of these layers. In other words, three different standards bodies control the storage process ensuring the overall area is not well standardized at all.
Optimal network management is possible through the ability to monitor and control network systems from a single location. As a result, the process has become very simple for even the largest of networks. In fact, all large organizations have a NOC (News - Alert) with the ability to effectively drive network management and control networks located around the world from one single location.
While this capability would optimize network storage and monitoring, there are a number of problems that are preventing this streamlined approach from becoming a reality. Storage devices are not very open in terms of management and files systems often prove to be unmanageable without the tool designed for each vendor file system. And, without an economic reason to change – why would it?
The bottom line here is that network management is today a streamlined process that eases the burden on the IT department. That ease is negated by the extra attention needed for the management and monitoring of storage. As no true incentives exist to make the change – outside of the individual IT departments – it isn’t likely to alter much in the coming years. And, while it could complicate network management overall for the IT director, internal changes can streamline the focus.
By 