Disqus - Latest Comments for aneel

Re: representing non-linearity in project execution

aneel — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 15:41:37 -0000

Yeah yeah.. having a better model does not get rid of the need for proj managers to use their brains. But hopefully it makes it easier for them to do so.

Re: representing non-linearity in project execution

aneel — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 14:07:32 -0000

Huh.. that's an interesting approach. Very systems-y.

So here proj mgmt is an 1) orchestration facility btwn objects and 2) the message queue owner. Yeah?

Re: representing non-linearity in project execution

aneel — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 14:05:02 -0000

Typically, yeah. But I contend that they shouldn't be so separate. Project management often fails because it can't consume, regurgitate, represent, or process (ha!) the impact of the actual process of what must go on.

And process management fails because it's willfully ignorant of time.

Re: brooklyner curatorial — The 50 best foods in the world and where to eat them | Life and style | The Observer

aneel — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 16:20:55 -0000

I'll have to add those to the list!

Re: Transition to the Cloud

aneel — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 15:41:17 -0000

Congrats Dave!

Re: irq

aneel — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 22:43:41 -0000

I don't think they're any harder to acquire. I think it's more that managers who can't make promote sanctuaries of management-heaviness within large organizations.

Re: IDs, Vanity URLs and YOUR NAME

aneel — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 10:01:27 -0000

I agree with trying to maintain name consistency.. but you can't always be first to grab a handle. What I do is maintain profile & link consistency. E.g. all my profiles point back to either my twitter handle, linked in profile, or tumblog--all of which point to each other.

On the move to a more bloggy blog front, I actually went the other direction: from a wordpress blog on my own domain hosted by joyent to a tumblog, because I wanted to separate out tech/work stuff from the rest of my life. And enough of that tech/work stuff was just light commentary that a blog platform to maintain seemed like overkill.

Re: irq

aneel — Fri, 22 May 2009 08:11:46 -0000

:) I didn't say "silly" for nothin'.

Re: irq

aneel — Thu, 21 May 2009 23:38:39 -0000

As it so happens, I disagree with both Maritz's view and Ruben's.. and well, with most everyone's definition of 'private'.

I think 'private' would be best defined as a cloud to which only "trusted users" (as Hoff would say) have access. Whether it's located on your premises or a host's premises, on shared or dedicated infrastructure, managed by you or someone else, owned by you or someone else, on your stack or someone else's--is besides the point.

But that's just me.

I made a silly deck that spells it out.

Re: the googling of infrastructure again

aneel — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 20:56:57 -0000

A couple of thoughts about that..

- Although googley architecture does virtualize (at least I think it does) at the app level, that doesn't mean their [hardware] infrastructure platform couldn't be used otherwise.

- There are enterprises who build dynamic, statistically data-driven and managed, etc., infrastructures that provide cloud-like characteristics to their end-users doing things very similar to the way that google does them.. they just don't like to talk about it. :-)

- Totally agree on the HPC point. Where do you think all the networking vendors are getting their ideas for building fast, huge-scaling, non-blocking fabrics?

Re: hi

aneel — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 10:26:23 -0000

testing disqus<->tumblr integration

Re: Fibre Channel over Ethernet or Infiniband: a Response — Dave Graham's Weblog

aneel — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 00:18:17 -0000

A couple of thoughts:

Re IB performance: Duh. However--CEE at 10Gb, and especially at 40 & 100Gb, should change that. The economics of that will be interesting to see.

Re the overhead of 3 separate fabrics: IMHO if you're already already dealing with 1/10GbE & FC, then it isn't particularly onerous to collapse the two into FCoE at the access layer. You're still managing GbE & FC. If the FCoE works as the standards in dev say it should, then the added management overhead of 1 (not 3) additional fabric that works in ways similar to the existing ones isn't going to be significantly more. Of course, it won't work the way it should--that's where you'll suffer.

Re moving IB out from HPC into the rest of the network: now that would be interesting.

Re: Cisco's Nexus 1000v and the Cloud: Is it really a big deal?

aneel — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 10:01:55 -0000

VN-Link is just the capacity to support persistent network services for a VM which can be achieved with either an nx5k or the nx1000v according to this Cisco VN-Link intro. Actual stacking capacity is still an open question--but the data sheet you link implies there is some ability to have the nx1000v span physical boxes (at least 2) and that that would be a prereq for maintaining network state after a vMotion move.

Re: Porchetta

aneel — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 22:20:50 -0000

Nice. :)

Re: Watch out for Cisco, kids!

aneel — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 10:08:47 -0000

Brocade is going down the same road--though they obviously think storage is the center of the universe and spend a lot less time talking about network virtualization, vm portability, orchestration and a few other things than they should.

Re: Web Discussions: Leaving The Instigator Out

aneel — Sat, 31 May 2008 14:46:54 -0000

If these free services go two-way.. and give up those eyeballs, don't they shut off a possible monetization avenue (via advertising) because they cease to become a destination of any kind?

Re: Doriot Quote Of The Day

aneel — Sat, 31 May 2008 14:33:14 -0000

Another vote to keep'em coming.

Re: Claiming a comment

aneel — Fri, 02 May 2008 20:52:49 -0000

Figured I'd just add to the thread.. I can't claim a comment/profile, either. Here it is: http://disqus.com/people/8e9f4a1fa29a0923f59f30...