Why "Scaling Up" Your Network Infrastructure Always Leads to More Complexity and Cost - Part 1
March 18, 2019

Alastair Hartrup
Network Critical

Share this

IT departments are increasingly focused on major technological innovations that ultimately require frequent network infrastructure upgrades. Just look at the growing prominence of IoT, edge computing and software-defined networks. But according to Enterprise Management Associates, navigating the complexity of network architecture and attempting to scale or expand infrastructure are two of the top challenges for businesses when dealing with their networks. The problem: when networks aren't built to scale, emerging technologies end up out-pacing current network capacities, adding unnecessary cost and complexity.

Network Packet Brokers play a critical role in gaining visibility into these new complex networks. They deliver the packet data and information IT and security teams need to identify problems, recognize security issues, and ensure overall network performance. However, not all Packet Brokers are created equal when it comes to scalability. Simply "scaling up" your network infrastructure at every growth point is a more complex and more expensive endeavor over time — cutting into business profitability and productivity. Instead, building network architectures that can "scale out" — quickly adding ports, changing speeds or capabilities — is often a better approach.

Let's explore three ways the "scale up" approach to infrastructure growth impedes NetOps and security professionals (and the business as a whole). Based on these shortcomings, we can then dive into the benefits of scale-out visibility, which can help organizations grow when new technology initiatives alter network requirements.

1. Hardware Investments

When it comes to network infrastructure (including Packet Brokers), the "scale up" approach for hardware often includes buying a big box solution with a bazillion ports. Those ports get used as needed (which often translates to just a small fraction of them), while the unused ports sit idle for "future use" — a simple but wasteful growth solution. With networks growing at a faster rate than budgets these days, investing in idle-assets is often sub-optimal.

The other "scale up" approach is to purchase only the unit that matches today's exact needs, and then when required, decommission the existing unit and buy the next model up. Vendors like to promote the "product family" idea as scaling up. For example, if you purchase the X-1 now, you can later purchase the X-2, X-3, X-4 when you need more ports or power. This family scaling certainly can keep the customer loyal to a vendor by providing a simple upgrade path with familiar operation and management, but it's also wasteful as the smaller product is usually replaced well before the end of its useful life.

For many organizations, a better approach is to "scale out." Buy a smaller base unit that meets your immediate needs and build incrementally as you grow. This includes purchasing a right-sized base unit for initial requirements (call it the "mothership" appliance), then transparently adding on to the initial purchase as growth requires with modules that easily integrate (and leverage the intelligence of the "mothership" unit). This approach protects budget disciplined teams, while still providing a path for seamless (and less disruptive) growth in the future. The IT stakeholder no longer has to pay for something it might use in the future or purchase expensive new appliances along the way.

Read Why "Scaling Up" Your Network Infrastructure Always Leads to More Complexity and Cost - Part 2

Alastair Hartrup is CEO of Network Critical
Share this

The Latest

March 26, 2020

While remote work policies have been gaining steam for the better part of the past decade across the enterprise space — driven in large part by more agile and scalable, cloud-delivered business solutions — recent events have pushed adoption into overdrive ...

March 25, 2020

Time-critical, unplanned work caused by IT disruptions continues to plague enterprises around the world, leading to lost revenue, significant employee morale problems and missed opportunities to innovate, according to the State of Unplanned Work Report 2020, conducted by Dimensional Research for PagerDuty ...

March 24, 2020

In today's iterative world, development teams care a lot more about how apps are running. There's a demand for fixing actionable items. Developers want to know exactly what's broken, what to fix right now, and what can wait. They want to know, "Do we build or fix?" This trade-off between building new features versus fixing bugs is one of the key factors behind the adoption of Application Stability management tools ...

March 23, 2020

With the rise of mobile apps and iterative development releases, Application Stability has answered the widespread need to monitor applications in a new way, shifting the focus from servers and networks to the customer experience. The emergence of Application Stability has caused some consternation for diehard APM fans. However, these two solutions embody very distinct monitoring focuses, which leads me to believe there's room for both tools, as well as different teams for both ...

March 19, 2020

The 2019 State of E-Commerce Infrastructure Report, from Webscale, analyzes findings from a comprehensive survey of more than 450 ecommerce professionals regarding how their online stores performed during the 2019 holiday season. Some key insights from the report include ...