Last Tuesday, our own Ben Erwin and Michael Leonard, Project Marketing Manager at Cisco, gave a Webinar entitled: “Building Performance-first Application Delivery Networks with Cisco and NetQoS,” where they showed attendees scenario based demonstrations based on a model of “Baseline, Optimize, Control, Quantify, and Troubleshoot,” which is one of the few models in IT that doesn’t have a catchy acronym. I mean, seriously, “BOCQT?” Isn’t that the sound a Ukranian hen makes?

Anyway, Ben Erwin and Michael Leonard have written up answers to all of the questions that they simply weren’t able to get to in the original time allotted. These answers are below:

Q: Our corporate data center has two connections into our MPLS network (for redundancy). How can WAAS be deployed in this scenario?

A: WAAS could be deployed on either or both links. WAAS is aware of asymmetric routing environments, so WAAS can deal with traffic that goes out on one link and returns on the other.

Q: If the NetQoS module or modules require NetFlow, please make a point of mentioning that. We don't have NetFlow, and don't want to buy it unless we have to.

A: The traffic analysis module does require NetFlow (or any flow export data source). If you have Cisco routers and switches in place today, then you already have NetFlow. NetFlow is included in the hardware at no additional cost.

Q: Is ACE optimization available on the ACE modules yet?

A: Yes, you can use ACE to optimize application delivery and baseline, quantify, and troubleshoot with NetQoS.

Q: How do you support new protocols for a new app?

A: NetQoS will automatically detect new protocols on the network. You can then choose to monitor application delivery and the appropriate optimization technology from Cisco.

Q: Can I view my virtual servers with this product?

A: Yes. NetQoS will allow you to monitor traffic to/from virtual servers. WAAS and ACE will also optimize application traffic to/from virtual servers.

Q: Which Cisco platforms must we be on to take advantage of the integration of Cisco and NetQoS?

A: For optimization, Cisco WAAS and ACE. In addition, any router/switch supporting NetFlow, IP SLA, CBQoS, or NBAR will also provide reporting into NetQoS.

Q: What are the instrumentation feeds to NetQoS: WAAS flow agent? NetFlow? What else?

A: SNMP, raw packets, Cisco UC (VoIP) metrics

Q: Does WAAS/ACE work with IPv6 addresses?

A: Not today, but it is under consideration for a future release.

Q: I understand there must be a pair of WAAS for each WAN link, how about ACE, does that need to be a pair also?

A: No. ACE is only deployed in the data center near the server farms.

Q: Do you support any data sources that require a network tap?

A: Nothing requires a network tap. However, a tap can be used to feed NetQoS raw packet data instead of a mirror (SPAN) port.

Q: How well does this technology work with MPLS?

A: All of the technologies mentioned in the presentation can function in MPLS environments. Cisco can optimize traffic over MPLS networks and NetQoS can monitor the delivery of applications over MPLS networks.

Q: Do I need an extra Aggregator for monitoring the WAEs or does a SuperAgent see the statistics of the WAEs ?

A: SuperAgent does require an Aggregator to view traffic from the WAE (WAAS) appliances.

Q: Does NetQoS collect/trend IP SLA data?

A: Yes. NetQoS collects and historically trends IP SLA data.

Q: Are there any detailed documents (engineer level) describing exactly how the integration works between the WAE/WAAS modules and SuperAgent. I need detail to explain exactly why I need it.

A: Yes. If you're a customer or prospect contact your NetQoS account rep. If not, contact the NetQoS sales team at sales@netqos.com and request a technical discussion on the integration.

Q: Is there an agent for the ACE?

A: No. ACE does not require agents.

Q: How does WAAS/ACE work with encryption?

A: Both WAAS and ACE interoperate with SSL encrypted traffic.

Q: We use RDP port 3389 for access to our Server farm. Can we implement NetQoS with this environment?

A: Yes. NetQoS can monitor traffic over RDP ports.

Q: Is this solution well suited for video streaming applications, specifically, real time video feeds?

A: Yes, NetQoS can monitor video traffic's impact on WAN bandwidth, network performance, and application delivery. WAAS has support for Microsoft media based video. WAAS will send only one stream over the core and split stream at the branch to conserve bandwidth.

Q: We are not using Cisco WAAS, but rather a competing product; can you touch upon interoperability with other WAN Acceleration vendors and more on the QoS specific functionality for tuning that?

A: NetQoS can provide traffic statistics if you're product exports flow records. However, these may not be very useful if the optimized traffic is tunneled. You cannot receive accurate response metrics with a non-Cisco optimization product and NetQoS (or any other performance monitoring vendor). Response time monitoring capabilities for optimized environments are only available with the combination of NetQoS and Cisco. Therefore, you would not be able to quantify the impact of any QoS tuning.

Q: Does deploying WAAS include NetQoS SuperAgent functionality, or are they separate products? I heard a rumor that deploying WAAS includes SuperAgent functionality.

A: They are separate products. However, WAAS does include NetQoS code that allows it to interoperate with NetQoS SuperAgent.

Q: How many of Cisco's IP SLA tests does NetQoS currently support? And will NetQoS add support to cover all of Cisco's IP SLA tests?

A: NetQoS supports all of the Cisco IP SLA tests today.

Q: Does WAAS differentiate between MPLS Class of service?

A: Yes, WAAS can give priority and process traffic according to DSCP marking.

Q: If it's not outside the scope of this presentation, can you talk about the performance differences between the inline and non-inline deployment models?

A: Performance is similar in both instances. WAAS implements WCCP as the primary method for non-inline and is tuned to work effectively with the device it is redirecting traffic to so as not to overload it.

Q: Strategically, assuming availability of higher WAN bandwidth at a lower cost, what becomes the core strength of WAAS?

A: WAAS allows you to use your bandwidth more effectively so that you don’t need to overprovision and WAAS overcomes the impact of latency on application performance. Even if you have enough bandwidth in theory, you might not be able to fill the pipe due to the behavior of TCP on links with high latency.

Q: Can you export NAM data to NetQoS today?

A: NetQoS can collect data from NAM’s today via SNMP.

Q: Even custom applications with custom communication formats?

A: Yes. Any custom IP application can interoperate with NetQoS and Cisco.

Q: I take it that this device would allow to see how affective your QOS policy is being. Does this take the place of the QoS Manager?

A: Yes WAAS allows you to see what applications are using your bandwidth and how much bandwidth they are using as well as how much reduction in bandwidth usage WAAS is providing per application. WAAS works with the QoS policies on your router. WAAS can make separate QoS control device unnecessary.

Q: Do I need NetFlow enabled on the remote site and the head office router to do a baseline?

A: NetFlow can be enabled in either location. Baseline calculations are independent of the NetFlow source or location.

Q: The SuperAgent can't tell anything about response times of UDP traffic, but does the SuperAgent show the amount of UDP traffic?

A: Correct, SuperAgent cannot monitor the delivery UDP applications. However, the NetQoS traffic analysis capabilities with Cisco NetFlow can show the amount of UDP traffic on the network. In addition, NetQoS can report Cisco IP SLA metrics to measure UDP latency.

Q: How many (max) ports per NetQoS appliance. Are we talking fiber? Fiber channel?

A: Depending on the capabilities needed, appliances come with 2, 4, or 8 ports with copper, fiber, or fiber channel connectivity.

Q: What hardware is required at a branch office to deploy WAAS?

A: WAAS can be deployed as an appliance or as a network module for the Cisco ISR router.

Q: How do appropriately size the model of WAAS hardware for your network?

A: Cisco provides a sizing tool and sizing guidelines. Sizing is based on throughput requirements and the number of TCP connections to be supported. WAAS was tested by an independent test facility to scale to over 50,000 TCP connections.

Q: How big is the impact on Cisco router processor load, when using NetFlow reporting?

A: 2% or less impact to CPU cycles on any Cisco router/switch model.

Q: Which segment do you use CBQoS statistics and into which metric does it get aggregated?

A: CBQoS data is collected via SNMP with the NetQoS device management capabilities.

Q: Can NetQoS read the real underlying application if another port is used?

A: Yes, NetQoS can provide full deep packet inspection capabilities to read any layer of the application.

Q: How does WAAS work with encrypted MAPI (email) from branch to datacenter?

A: Support for encrypted MAPI is under consideration for a future release. Currently WAAS will not apply full optimizations if the traffic is encrypted but will provide the default L4 optimizations that are effective for Exchange cached mode.

Q: Can WAAS encrypt its optimized traffic?

A: WAAS can encrypt data stored on the disk and WAAS can optimize SSL encrypted traffic. WAAS does not encrypt traffic in flight. WAAS interoperates with your security infrastructure.

Q: Is WAAS and ACE required to measure transactions response time?

A: No. Application delivery and response times can be measured with NetQoS without WAAS or ACE. However, WAAS and ACE are required to optimize the delivery of applications.

By Ben Erwin

Even the WAN optimization vendors are starting to realize that WAN optimization’s utility is diminished without visibility into the network.

Riverbed’s recent announcement shows that they, (and other WAN optimization and acceleration vendors), are recognizing the dependency between better network management and successful WAN optimization projects. The partner vendors mentioned in the announcement all provide some level of network management capabilities, from network configuration to application delivery monitoring. These partnerships are part of a growing trend since network management capabilities are critical to understanding WAN optimization’s ROI and impact on network performance.

In addition to third-party partnerships, WAN optimization vendors have also developed their own technology to improve integration with network management vendors. Riverbed, Juniper, Cisco, and Blue Coat (Packeteer) have all developed traffic flow export capabilities within their WAN optimization appliances to help customers better understand WAN optimization’s impact on application flows. For example, a large insurance brokerage company exports traffic flow records from Riverbed appliances to NetQoS ReporterAnalyzer to help visualize changes to volume, rate, and bandwidth utilization for every application on the optimized link. This flow export alongside ReporterAnalyzer provides the customer with continued visibility across the link for future troubleshooting, traffic analysis, or capacity planning efforts.

While traffic flow and per application bandwidth utilization information is critical to managing application delivery, it’s only part of the story. The other part is measuring latency of mission critical applications between remote sites and the data center – a more tangible metric of WAN optimization’s ROI and impact on the end-user experience. This measurement can be nearly impossible to obtain since WAN optimization appliances obfuscate application transactions between clients and servers, breaking up the TCP stream.

In order to get around the broken TCP stream problem, we at NetQoS entered into a partnership with Cisco to provide unique technology which measures end-to-end latency over Cisco Wide Area Application Services (WAAS) optimized WAN connections. By integrating our NetQoS SuperAgent technology, WAAS users can get client and server-side data collection and reporting capabilities.

To our knowledge, Cisco and NetQoS currently provide the market’s only solution for accurate latency measurements for client and server communication over optimized links.

WAN optimization is all about improving application delivery. Collecting volume, rate, and bandwidth utilization on optimized applications is only part of the solution. Truly understanding ROI on WAN optimization requires accurately measuring network latency and the end-user experience.

Ben Erwin is technical marketing manager at NetQoS and on Tuesday, May 27, 2008, he will be presenting a Webinar on Building Performance-first Application Delivery Networks with Cisco and NetQoS.

Kevin Davis, a senior consultant at NetQoS, will be presenting a few training sessions at Symposium about SuperAgent, the end-to-end response time module of the NetQoS Performance Center. This will include a training session about how to use time-based network metrics in troubleshooting.  He talks about his upcoming training session below.

In the session, I’m going to be covering the importance of using a time-based metric in troubleshooting, because end-users complain foremost about time.  For example, they’ll say “the application is running slow,” or they believe “the network is slow.”  To users, everything is based on time, that’s what they’re complaining about.  And they’re correct.

It’s very new to many people to think of performance in “time” although that may seem counterintuitive - because most people are used to reading utilization graphs.  With utilization graphs, however, we don’t know if 70 or 80 or 90 percent utilization is necessarily impacting the user experience.  I mean, we buy networking equipment, routers, switches, firewalls, servers, and we want them to be highly – or efficiently - utilized.  Seeing high utilization could indicate a problem – or it could just indicate that you haven’t over-purchased.  So you can have a link at 90% utilization or a router at ninety percent CPU utilization but you won’t know if that’s impacting the end-user without a time based metric.

It’s time-based data that tells you how the users are being impacted.  Sure, the utilization data – the interface utilization, memory utilization, I/O utilization, can often tell what is doing the impact.  But the time base shows you the degree of the impact – the real-world effect on end-users.  With a time-based instrument, such as NetQoS SuperAgent, you can find out where the delay increase is occurring, and whether it’s based in the network, server, or application. 

In fact, you can take a look at time-based data and make a determination very quickly as to which entity is creating the performance issue – the beautiful thing about SuperAgent, in particular, is that it trends by time 24/7, so not only can you determine how your important business applications are being impacted today, but you can go back and look at recurring patterns in performance issues.  You can see if today is worse than yesterday or last week or last month.

In the session, I’ll also be going over how to architect the data center for performance.  Placement of servers that participate in inter-architectures is critical for the health and performance of the application and indeed the data center.  We also talk about how different protocols, for example, Microsoft’s TCP/IP stack, can impact application performance by enhancing or degrading it. 

It’s important for servers that are serving the same application.  For example, a front-end Web server and a back-end Oracle database really should be on the same switch on the same VLAN.  That way they receive optimum service from the network.  If they do leave the switch, they’ll have to contend with bandwidth going up and down the switch links, and they’ll be switched and routed multiple times. 

Based on measurements from customer environments and from our own laboratories, when two servers are on different switches they can have up to 18 milliseconds delay between them.  If we think of that in the terms of network engineers of one millisecond per 100 miles, what in effect we’re doing when we put two different servers on different switches, or two different VLANs on the same switch, we’re making it look like those servers are 1800 miles apart – like one server is in Los Angeles and the other is in Memphis. 

by Patrick Ancipink
Director of Product Marketing, NetQoS

There’s been a lot of growth (and attendant hype) in technology areas like WAN optimization and application acceleration over the past few years, and for good reason. Anything that helps companies speed up and reduce the risk of strategic IT initiatives like consolidating data centers, turning up new branches or serving an increasingly mobile and scattered user community will be popular.

To help with cope with the increasing reliance on the WAN and keep latency in check, there are a dizzying array of vendors and products out there – but if you’re trying to determine precisely which techniques and technologies to implement for your specific needs, the array of vendors quickly goes from “dizzying” to “disorienting” and finally “nauseating.” 

Cisco’s been in this Tilt-a-Whirl™ of a market for a while (and NetQoS has been right there with them) and they’ve taken some big steps recently to provide a more holistic approach that centers on building an “application aware” network, rather than trying to highlight one type of implementation against another for a narrow set of capabilities.

NetQoS started working exclusively with Cisco closely to help customers evaluate, measure, and prove the effectiveness of WAN optimization and application acceleration deployments. As customers are moving from pilot phases into full production, the before/after measurements and comprehensive monitoring are critical to ensure customers are getting the benefits they intended and doing what they need to deliver application performance. 

To help get the word out, Cisco just launched a new section of their web site today that contains a wealth of information about, as they call it, “WAN and Application Optimization.” The downloadable presentation, Cisco WAN and Application Optimization Technical Overview Presentation, puts Cisco technologies (and complimentary ones, NetQoS included) into a useful context with a methodical approach and framework built around four steps: Profile and Baseline, Optimize, Evolve, and Operate. A whole Campbell’s Factory of Cisco alphabet soup technologies are included—WAAS, ACE, NBAR, Netflow, CBQoS, IP SLA, PfR—to show how they work in concert and what role they play in the bigger picture.

There’s also the Cisco WAN and Application Optimization Solution Guide , a very in-depth publication—like 227 pages deep—that is targeted for “technical personnel involved in the specification, design, and implementation of specific WAN and application optimization solutions.” We, here at NetQoS, are proud to have contributed several sections to book regarding the methodology and implementation of network performance monitoring for WAN optimization and application acceleration. 

(If you are looking for some lighter fare, the video on the site tells a nice story in about 6 minutes including an airshow, snowmobiles, windsurfers, and skydiving—interesting choices for demonstrating the criticality of serving video over the WAN.  Then again, some company somewhere has to make the recreational products, I suppose.)

If you missed his presentation at Cisco Networkers, we have a slightly abridged version of Dr. Steve Fulton explaining how to quantify the impact of WAN optimization on application performance, as part of our "Whiteboard Series."

(Our apologies: there is no actual whiteboard used in this video. We just didn't want to go through the trouble of creating a separate "PowerPoint Series" graphic and category.)

If you have questions about the video, please leave a comment below and we'll do our best to answer them.
--------------
More information:

About WAN Optimization:
- What’s Behind Door #2: WAN Optimization and the Transparency Problem
- WAAS Up with Cisco's WAN Optimization Initiative?

Also in our Whiteboard Series:
- The impact of Voice/Video on Data Applications
- The impact of WAN Optimization on TCP Applications
- The impact of WAN Optimization on NetFlow/IPFIX measurements

Tuesday Links On Wednesday: Coverage from the NetQoS/Cisco WAAS announcement, and other stuff.

First, here's what people are saying about yesterday's NetQoS/Cisco announcement:

• ZDNet UK: IT pros get to grips with WAN reports
• EWeek: Cisco, NetQOS Prove WAN Optimization Gains
• Network World: Cisco adds security, monitoring to WAN optimization gear
• Search Networking: Cisco adds monitoring to WAAS
• Network Computing: Cisco and NetQoS Partner for WAN Optimization and Performance Monitoring
• Techworld.com UK: WAN optimisation breaking app monitoring

And… some other things may have happened…

Wired - 27B Stroke 6: ISP Seen Breaking Internet Protocol to Fight Zombie Computers

ISPs, taking action against botnets on IRC, have been redirecting attempts to reach certain online IRC channels. The plus side: It does take care of some bots. The downside - breaking the DNS protocol prohibits access for all users.

"Specifically, Cox's DNS server is responding to a domain name request for an Internet Relay Chat server. Instead of responding with the correct IP address for the server, Cox sends the IP address of its own IRC server (70.168.70.4). That server then sends commands to the computer that attempt to remove malware."

What I'm worried about is the legal aspects - if ISPs can "edit" the type of material passing through the network by breaking DNS, do they lose a common carrier legal status? That is, of course, assuming this type of redirection is even legal.

In related news, some ISPs have been inserting advertisements into web pages - this site from the University of Washington and the International Computer Science Institute should help you determine if that's the case on your network.

The big problem with WAN Optimization and Application Performance Monitoring was that there simply wasn't a WAN Optimization solution on the market that preserved end-to-end performance data, nor a monitoring solution that would work in an optimized WAN.

This problem has been solved.

At Cisco Networkers in Anaheim, NetQoS gave a presentation to hundreds of attendees to make the announcement that we've been working with Cisco to develop a management interface for accurate end-to-end application response time measurement that works on optimized networks. (In addition to the people mobbing our booth, John Chambers, CEO of Cisco Systems, stopped by for a chat and review of what we do.)

Through integrated software on Cisco Wide Area Application Services devices (WAAS), TCP header information is exported to NetQoS SuperAgent (an end-to-end application performance monitoring module) before optimization occurs - preserving that information. Finally, IT organizations can accurately validate the results of WAN Optimization deployments.

(Continued…)

Continue reading "Tracking The Optimized WAN: NetQoS Integrates with Cisco WAAS to Deliver End-to-End Application Response Time Reporting for WAN Optimization" »

During a recent NetQoS - Cisco WAN Optimization Seminar Series, and to some extent at Interop, NetQoS launched a survey regarding WAN Optimization. We found some interesting things:

Over 90% of the survey respondents said that it is either important or very important to be able to quantify accurately the results of WAN optimization.

Over 80% say it is important/very important to have integrated WAN optimization and performance reporting.

We also found that most respondents – 60% - believe that the most relevant measure of WAN optimization impact is in application and network latency. 30% believe that link utilization is the most relevant measure, and 10% believe that the two are equally important, with a handful of respondents saying that protocol distribution is the most important.

What this tells us is that many enterprise IT organizations do not want to deploy a WAN Optimization solution that is going to break their application and network performance monitoring. However, WAN Optimization devices perform local TCP ACKnowledgements, thereby confusing performance monitoring and making it near impossible to accurately quantify the results of WAN Optimization.

We go into this challenge more in “WAN Optimization’s Dirty Little Secret” and John Mao and Ben Erwin have uploaded some videos in Network Performance Daily’s Whiteboard Series to illustrate the points, but basically, many WAN Optimization devices (WOD) split a TCP/IP session between a client and server into three separate sessions – a client segment, a WAN segment (or “channel”), and a server segment. But data center-resident passive network monitoring tools assume only one TCP session between the client and server – which means that when WAN optimization is deployed, they only have visibility into the server segment response time – between the server and the data center WOD. So, visibility into all the components that make up end-user application response times, including network round trip time and data retransmission time, is lost.

If ultimately, IT is about application delivery – the reliability and speed with which you can deliver applications to the end-users – then forgoing application and network monitoring is not an option. We’ll have more on this problem next week. In the meantime we look forward to seeing you at Cisco Networkers in Anaheim.

--------------
More information:

On Quantifying the results of WAN Optimization

John Mao, product manager at NetQoS, quickly explains the impact of WAN Optimization on Cisco IOS NetFlow/IPFIX information gathering in a short video, as part of our "Whiteboard Series."

If you have questions about the video, please leave a comment below and we'll do our best to answer them.
--------------
More information:

On WAN Optimization:
- NetQoS and Cisco Webinar: Evaluating WAN Optimization Options and Quantifying the Results

On NetFlow Monitoring :

Also in our Whiteboard Series:
- The impact of WAN Optimization on TCP Applications

With John Mao:
- Six Tips for Improving Network Visibility and Performance Using Cisco IOS NetFlow Data

Ben Erwin, product manager at NetQoS, quickly explains the impact of WAN Optimization on TCP-based Applications in a short video, kicking off our "Whiteboard Series."

If you have questions about the video, please leave a comment below and we'll do our best to answer them.
--------------
More information:

On WAN Optimization:
- NetQoS and Cisco Webinar: Evaluating WAN Optimization Options and Quantifying the Results

Also in our Whiteboard Series:
- The impact of WAN Optimization on NetFlow/IPFIX measurements

With Ben Erwin:
- Third Party Integration and UI in the Enterprise