Ever since the concept of virtualization was promoted by marketing, companies have been nouring-up the idea of virtualization, and rightly so!
Given that virtualization over hardware is cost-efficient, moving with the technology curve, dynamic hardware changes, snapshots in time, and is even sharing the polar bears with their reduction of the server's energy consumption and heat emission, it's hard to justify against the idea.
However, companies I come across always in recent times want to implement hardware servers for their production environment and discard the idea of virtual production.
It's indisputable that technology is constantly changes and because of that, companies become subjected to technological demands of the business. Employees now having the ability to BYOD is a great example. Employees now want to access their flashy presentation charts ASAP on their latest, over-priced ipad.
The demand from the end user can be nieve because of the immediate changes that's now in the picture. Interoperability and security considerations with unregistered devices would be the first to come into people's minds.
There's many reasons to support hardware over virtualization though by far, the biggest business decision has to be risk. Because it's an emerging market and still evolving and maturing, companies are just not ready to take the plunge and delegate the infrastructure to virtual Your current production environment and topology is architecturally designed to accommodate hardware devices
Even though the use of virtualization in production does not necessary require changes in the operating procedures and controls in order to effectively manage operational risk though however your current production topology is designed to accommodate hardware servers and not necessary for virtual OS devices, so why change?
Regardless of the substantial benefits, the big issue is the maturity of virtualization and the practices that come with the package. Management is quite simply not ready to take that virtual leap until the area matures
About the author
Daniel is a Technical Manager with over 10 years of consulting expertise in the Identity and Access Management space.Daniel has built from scratch this blog as well as technicalconfessions.com
Follow Daniel on twitter @nervouswiggles
Comments
Other Posts
AS I was migrating my environment into an S3 environment, I wanted to leverage off the SES services that AWS provide, more specifically, to leverage the off the SMTP functionality by sending an email via PHP
Read More...
The WeMos D1 is a ESP8266 WiFi based board is an extension to the current out-of-the-box library that comes with the Arduino installation. Because of this, you need to import in the libraries as well as acknowledging the specific board. This process is highly confusion with a number of different individuals talking about a number of different ways to integrate.
Read More...
NameID element must be present as part of the Subject in the Response message, please enable it in the IDP configuration.
Read More...
For what I see, there's not too many supportive documentations out there that will demonstrate how provision AD group membership with the ICF connector using OpenIDM. The use of the special ldapGroups attribute is not explained anywhere in the Integrators guides to to the date of this blog. This quick blog identifies the tasks required to provision AD group membership from OpenIDM to AD using the LDAP ICF connector. However this doesn't really explain what ldapGroups actually does and there's no real worked example of how to go from an Assignment to ldapGroups to an assigned group in AD. I wrote up a wiki article for my own reference: AD group memberships automatically to users This is just my view, others may disagree, but I think the implementation experience could be improved with some more documentation and a more detailed example here.
Read More...
In the past, the similar error occurred though for the Oracle Identity Management solution. invalidcredentialexception remote framework key is invalid Because they all share the ICF connector framework, the error/solution would be the same.
Read More...
org.forgerock.script.exception.ScriptCompilationException: missing ; before statement
Read More...
ForgeRock IDM - org.forgerock.script.exception.ScriptCompilationException: missing ; before statement
Read More...
When performing the attempt of a reconciliation from ForgeRock IDM to Active Directory, I would get the following error
Read More...
In the past, the similar error occurred though for the Oracle Identity Management solution. invalidcredentialexception remote framework key is invalid Because they all share the ICF connector framework, the error/solution would be the same.
Read More...
During the reconcilation from OpenIDM to the ICF google apps connector, the following error response would occur. ERROR Caused by com.google.api.client.auth.oauth2.TokenResponseException 400 Bad Request - invalid_grant
Read More...