6 ms·

Can anyone tell me why Intel, Cisco, Juniper, etc are part of Open Compute Project? It doesn't really make sense to me because this project is effectively desig

by IBM 10y ago

Can anyone tell me why Intel, Cisco, Juniper, etc are part of Open Compute Project? It doesn't really make sense to me because this project is effectively designed to commoditize their business. It makes sense for Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Apple, etc to be in OCP because server and networking hardware is purely a cost and isn't the part of the value chain that they profit from.

kchoudhu 10y ago
The networking giants at least aren't planning on selling hardware for much longer: they want to become purveyors of SDN technology that runs on commodity OCP-style hardware. I am guessing they are part of these initiatives so that they have some influence over what their code runs on.
- IBM 10y ago
  That makes sense. Is this a case of trading hardware dollars for SDN cents or does it bridge the gap? I have no idea about the economics of this space.
- devonkim 10y ago
  Who's going to sell hardware if not for the networking giants though? While hardware may be a declining business in terms of revenue it doesn't mean that there's no business either. After all, the big cloud providers will all have to source hardware from someone even if everyone goes whole hog into the OCP ecosystem with cheap, large scale vendors based primarily in low cost of business regions. Who's better equipped to handle economies of scale better than large companies in our world? Did I miss something about manufacturing trends being disrupted in the past 15 years? If anything, these vendors would want some say on the SDN systems so that their hardware can better integrate with them and offer more compelling value than their competitors.
  - mcpherrinm 10y ago
    Network switches are increasingly being based on silicon from companies like broadcom with their Trident and Tomahawk line (what Facebook's six pack use), Intel's Fulcrum chips, Mellanox, or Cavium's Xpliant chips. An ODM vendor like Quanta makes the equivalent of a "motherboard" for those, and sticks it in a box. Then you can get software from a vendor like Cumulus which has all the SDN goodness. Vendors like Cisco, Juniper, or Arista sold all of those as one big product. Whitebox switching is about breaking those up so you can buy them more like you buy your servers.
  - wmf 10y ago
    The idea is to buy the hardware from ODMs like Quanta, Accton, Celestica, Foxconn, etc. They already manufacture all name-brand IT equipment anyway.
  - discodave 10y ago
    > Who's going to sell hardware if not for the networking giants though? AWS, GCP and Azure will sell you hardware, with a bunch of other services on top.
wmf 10y ago
All "commodity" servers use Intel processors so Intel isn't really losing anything. Juniper is just sticking their toe in and trying to look cool. Cisco is probably trying to sabotage it from the inside.
- IBM 10y ago
  Seems like Intel's margins are a good incentive for OCP members to design their own processors. Google has made some noise about that (but I guess that could be a bluff as well) [1]. [1] https://www.wired.com/2016/05/googles-making-chips-now-time-intel-freak/ https://www.wired.com/2016/05/googles-making-chips-now-time-...
  - gogopuppygogo 10y ago
    Hardware is hard and expensive. I doubt there is enough industry support financially to commit to designing an open source CPU to be compatible with software designed for Intel CPU's. It's just the cost of doing business.
    - wmf 10y ago
      Compatibility isn't what it used to be; all Google software runs on x86, Power, and probably ARM. There are probably a dozen ARM server processors being designed right now, so either there's a huge bubble or the market is big enough.
rixed 10y ago
Not that I disagree with what others have said, but I've found that the bigger the company and the more misleading is the mental model of a company as a single, unique, self conscious entity that would take decision according to its own interest. Behind companies decisions there are real persons taking decisions or supporting them for their own personal agendas that are not visible from the outside.
richardwhiuk 10y ago
Joining a project is the best way of mucking things up. Apart from that negative viewpoint: Intel are providing the expensive component (the CPU) so it's in their interest for the complement (the chipset/motherboard/chassis) to be a comodity. Juniper/Cisco are supplying the network infrastructure, so they want the attached servers to be as cheap as possible.

by IBM 10y ago

kchoudhu 10y ago

The networking giants at least aren't planning on selling hardware for much longer: they want to become purveyors of SDN technology that runs on commodity OCP-style hardware. I am guessing they are part of these initiatives so that they have some influence over what their code runs on.

IBM 10y ago
That makes sense. Is this a case of trading hardware dollars for SDN cents or does it bridge the gap? I have no idea about the economics of this space.
devonkim 10y ago
Who's going to sell hardware if not for the networking giants though? While hardware may be a declining business in terms of revenue it doesn't mean that there's no business either. After all, the big cloud providers will all have to source hardware from someone even if everyone goes whole hog into the OCP ecosystem with cheap, large scale vendors based primarily in low cost of business regions. Who's better equipped to handle economies of scale better than large companies in our world? Did I miss something about manufacturing trends being disrupted in the past 15 years? If anything, these vendors would want some say on the SDN systems so that their hardware can better integrate with them and offer more compelling value than their competitors.
- mcpherrinm 10y ago
  Network switches are increasingly being based on silicon from companies like broadcom with their Trident and Tomahawk line (what Facebook's six pack use), Intel's Fulcrum chips, Mellanox, or Cavium's Xpliant chips. An ODM vendor like Quanta makes the equivalent of a "motherboard" for those, and sticks it in a box. Then you can get software from a vendor like Cumulus which has all the SDN goodness. Vendors like Cisco, Juniper, or Arista sold all of those as one big product. Whitebox switching is about breaking those up so you can buy them more like you buy your servers.
- wmf 10y ago
  The idea is to buy the hardware from ODMs like Quanta, Accton, Celestica, Foxconn, etc. They already manufacture all name-brand IT equipment anyway.
- discodave 10y ago
  > Who's going to sell hardware if not for the networking giants though? AWS, GCP and Azure will sell you hardware, with a bunch of other services on top.

wmf 10y ago

All "commodity" servers use Intel processors so Intel isn't really losing anything. Juniper is just sticking their toe in and trying to look cool. Cisco is probably trying to sabotage it from the inside.

IBM 10y ago
Seems like Intel's margins are a good incentive for OCP members to design their own processors. Google has made some noise about that (but I guess that could be a bluff as well) [1]. [1] https://www.wired.com/2016/05/googles-making-chips-now-time-intel-freak/ https://www.wired.com/2016/05/googles-making-chips-now-time-...
- gogopuppygogo 10y ago
  Hardware is hard and expensive. I doubt there is enough industry support financially to commit to designing an open source CPU to be compatible with software designed for Intel CPU's. It's just the cost of doing business.
  - wmf 10y ago
    Compatibility isn't what it used to be; all Google software runs on x86, Power, and probably ARM. There are probably a dozen ARM server processors being designed right now, so either there's a huge bubble or the market is big enough.

rixed 10y ago

Not that I disagree with what others have said, but I've found that the bigger the company and the more misleading is the mental model of a company as a single, unique, self conscious entity that would take decision according to its own interest. Behind companies decisions there are real persons taking decisions or supporting them for their own personal agendas that are not visible from the outside.

richardwhiuk 10y ago

Joining a project is the best way of mucking things up. Apart from that negative viewpoint: Intel are providing the expensive component (the CPU) so it's in their interest for the complement (the chipset/motherboard/chassis) to be a comodity. Juniper/Cisco are supplying the network infrastructure, so they want the attached servers to be as cheap as possible.