Last week I described the challenges Azure Route Server is supposed to solve. Now let’s dive deeper into how it’s implemented and what those implementation details mean for your design.
The whole thing looks relatively simple:
After reviewing Cisco SD-WAN policies, it’s time to dig into the routing design. In this section, David Penaloza enumerated several possible topologies, types of transport, their advantages and drawbacks, considerations for tunnel count and regional presence, and what you should consider beforehand when designing the solution from the control plane’s perspective.
Imagine you decided to deploy an SD-WAN (or DMVPN) network and make an Azure region one of the sites in the new network because you already deployed some workloads in that region and would like to replace the VPN connectivity you’re using today with the new shiny expensive gadget.
Everyone told you to deploy two SD-WAN instances in the public cloud virtual network to be redundant, so this is what you deploy:
The second part of the Cisco SD-WAN webinar focused on design considerations and trade-offs in several scenarios. David Penaloza briefly reviewed the types of policies and their capabilities before discussing what to keep in mind when designing the solution.
Right after Cisco SD-WAN devices are onboarded, how are the control and data plane tasks started? In this section, David Penaloza covers how Cisco SD-WAN solution makes the most of its SDN nature: single point of policy application and centralized management platform. The types of policies, the plane on which they act, their application and the actions that can performed are the main focus in this part of the series.
After describing Cisco SD-WAN architecture and routing capabilities, David Penaloza focused on the onboarding process and tasks performed by the Cisco SD-WAN solution (encryption, tunnel establishment, and device onboarding) in it’s so-called Orchestration Plane.
After covering the Cisco SD-WAN components and its architecture in the Cisco SD-WAN Foundations and Design Aspects webinar, David Penaloza focused on the routing capabilities it offers and its control plane characteristics, including types of routes and some scalability recommendations.
On May 14th 2020, Marcel Gamma, tech industry journalist, and editor-in-chief at inside-it.ch and inside-channels.ch, published an article discussing several glaring security vulnerabilities in Silver Peak’s SD-WAN products on inside-it.ch. The original article was written in German; Marcel was kind enough to translate it into English and get permission from his publisher to have the English version published on ipSpace.net.
Security researchers make serious accusations against SD-Wan manufacturer Silver Peak. The latter disagrees. Swiss experts are analyzing the case.
By Marcel Gamma,
Silver Peak is accused of laxity in dealing with security issues and in dealing with security researchers who act within the framework of Responsible Disclosure.
After describing Cisco SD-WAN fundamentals and its network abstraction mechanisms, David Penaloza explained the components of Cisco SD-WAN solution and its architecture, including in which plane each element operates and its assigned role in the overlay network.
I don’t know what’s wrong with me, but I rarely get emails along the lines of “I deployed SD-WAN and it was the best thing we did in the last decade” (trust me, I would publish those if they’d come from a semi-trusted source).
What I usually get are sad experiences from people being exposed to vendor brainwashing or deployments that failed to meet expectations (but according to Systems Engineering Director working for an aggressive SD-WAN vendor that’s just because they didn’t do their research, and thus did everything wrong).
Here’s another story coming from Adrian Giacometti.
After setting the stage clarifying the current Cisco SD-WAN deployment scenarios, David Penaloza focused on definitions and fundamentals that must be considered before dealing with solutions that hide and abstract complexity like overlays, routing, and network virtualization from the network administrator.
David Penaloza decided to demystify Cisco’s SD-WAN, provide real world experience beyond marketing hype, and clear confusing and foggy messages around what can or cannot be done with Cisco SD-WAN.
A reader of my blog was “blessed” with hands-on experience with SD-WAN offered by large service providers. Based on that experience he sent me his views on whether that makes sense. Enjoy ;)
We all have less-than-stellar opinions on service providers and their offerings. It is well known that those services are expensive and usually lacking quality, experience, or simply, knowledge. This applies to regular MPLS/BGP techniques as to - currently, the new challenge - SD-WAN.
In January 2020 Doug Heckaman documented his experience with VeloCloud SD-WAN. He tried to be positive, but for whatever reason this particular bit caught my interest:
Edge Gateways have a limited number of tunnels they can support […]
WTF? Wasn’t x86-based software packet forwarding supposed to bring infinite resources and nirvana? How badly written must your solution be to have a limited number of IPsec tunnels on a decent x86 CPU?
It’s amazing how quickly you get “must have feature Y or it should not be called X” comments coming from vendor engineers the moment you mention something vaguely-defined like SD-WAN.
Here are just two of the claims I got as a response to “BGP with IP-SLA is SD-WAN” trolling I started on LinkedIn based on this blog post:
Key missing features [of your solution]:
- real time circuit failover (100ms is not real-time)
- traffic steering (again, 100ms is not real-time)
Let’s get the facts straight: it seems Cisco IOS evaluates route-map statements using track objects in periodic BGP table scan process, so the failover time is on order of 30 seconds plus however long it takes IP SLA to detect the decreased link quality.