Comments for Techstrong IT https://techstrong.it/ Powering the Future of IT, Infrastructure & Innovation Thu, 02 Jan 2020 15:05:21 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 Comment on Digital Transformation is a Myth – The On-Premise IT Roundtable by That's All Folks - My 2019 Wrap Post ~ don't panic https://techstrong.it/podcast/digital-transformation-is-a-myth-the-on-premise-it-roundtable/#comment-779 Thu, 02 Jan 2020 15:05:21 +0000 http://gestaltit.com/?p=56723#comment-779 […] Recorded two On-Premise podcasts; one on Cloud and one on Digital Transformation. […]

]]>
Comment on The Cloud is Going to Disappear – The On-Premise IT Roundtable by That's All Folks - My 2019 Wrap Post ~ don't panic https://techstrong.it/podcast/the-cloud-is-going-to-disappear-the-on-premise-it-roundtable/#comment-777 Thu, 02 Jan 2020 15:03:22 +0000 http://gestaltit.com/?p=50871#comment-777 […] on Cloud and one on Digital […]

]]>
Comment on Wavebox: All Your Web Apps Are Belong To Us by Craig Walters https://techstrong.it/featured/wavebox-web-apps-belong-us/#comment-668 Mon, 02 Dec 2019 21:17:31 +0000 http://gestaltit.com/?p=41360#comment-668 Thanks for this review. You summed it up well

The problem was my expectations going in. I wanted Wavebox to be the all-in-one productivity messaging app of my dreams. It was usable with everything I throw at it, it just doesn’t particularly excel at any of it. It doesn’t add any functionality, other than saving me at Alt-Tab shortcut to hope between apps

]]>
Comment on Premise vs. Premises: A Modest Rebuttal by Stephen Foskett https://techstrong.it/featured/premise-vs-premises-modest-rebuttal/#comment-647 Mon, 04 Nov 2019 13:48:34 +0000 http://gestaltit.com/?p=40740#comment-647 In reply to John Gable.

You are correct. I can’t believe Rich got that wrong. Fixed.

]]>
Comment on Premise vs. Premises: A Modest Rebuttal by John Gable https://techstrong.it/featured/premise-vs-premises-modest-rebuttal/#comment-646 Tue, 29 Oct 2019 17:57:44 +0000 http://gestaltit.com/?p=40740#comment-646 As long as we’re being picky… roll not role. Thanks for the perspective.
.

]]>
Comment on Investing in the CWNE by JD https://techstrong.it/all/investing-in-the-cwne/#comment-785 Fri, 18 Oct 2019 13:43:02 +0000 http://gestaltit.com/?p=55899#comment-785 I would hate to think about how many applications they are currently looking at! Mine will be submitted in the next week or so as well, no use in waiting when it will just cost more.

]]>
Comment on Cross Pollinating Catalyst Platforms with NetBeez by Robert T https://techstrong.it/featured/cross-pollinating-catalyst-platforms-with-netbeez/#comment-778 Tue, 20 Aug 2019 00:57:01 +0000 http://gestaltit.com/?p=53068#comment-778 I was excited to hear about this when I sat through the presentation at CiscoLive 2019. I thought it was fantastic the way that DNA Center would push the software to the switch. My disappointment came when I found out the price of the SSD and there is no price break on the software version of NetBeez.

For me, it came down to price, I’m moving forward with NetBeez Raspberry Pi version. The solution is pretty slick and gives good insight into the performance of the network.

]]>
Comment on Tackling Troublesome Tunnels with 128 Technology by Pascal Heger https://techstrong.it/featured/tackling-troublesome-tunnels-with-128-technology/#comment-782 Sun, 18 Aug 2019 10:39:59 +0000 http://gestaltit.com/?p=52901#comment-782 Looking forward to see some of the content from the tech field day! Great article, and an interesting approach. Also, generally the DSCP values get copied into the IPsec header which means that tunneled traffic can get the same preferential treatment for QoS. Sure, you can’t classify and mark encrypted traffic mid-way, but you can classify, mark prior to it hitting the tunnel and then queue, police, etc. end to end for each hop the tunneled traffic hits.

In order to utilize multiple circuits you just build a tunnel per-circuit and mp bgp-load balance or per-packet load balance across them. (SD-WAN standard behavior)

Agree on the tunnel overhead even though bandwidth is less of a constraint nowadays. The constraint is in the vendors lack of interest/ability to utilize FPGA/ hardware based offloading that would allow us to push speeds > 10gbps encryption. This especially rings true in the virtual router space. Why can’t I launch my virtual router on an f-series ec2 instance?

I hope that someday providers will bump up the MTU sizes and enable jumbo over the internet.

Keep writing. Love your stuff!

]]>
Comment on The SD-WAN Future Is Now by Vik https://techstrong.it/all/the-sd-wan-future-is-now/#comment-569 Sat, 15 Jun 2019 22:48:12 +0000 http://gestaltit.com/?p=31544#comment-569 Hi Tom, looking back to the time you wrote this article – what has impeded adoption of SD-WAN?

]]>
Comment on All-in with SD-WAN and Fortinet by Vik https://techstrong.it/featured/all-in-with-sd-wan-and-fortinet/#comment-783 Sat, 15 Jun 2019 22:33:56 +0000 http://gestaltit.com/?p=52132#comment-783 Thanks. Good overview. It looks like the SD-WAN functionality can simply be turned on in existing FortiGate appliances. When you think of other vendors of SD-WAN, is combining security an advantage for Fortinet?

]]>