The blog-o-sphere has been abuzz of late with postings claiming that
SMI-S is
dead, or
dying. The claim being that the standard API/protocol has not fully replaced the need for proprietary ones. As if any management standard ever did. Perhaps if we all stopped adding features to our products, the standard could finally catch up ;-) You really can't compare management standards to to protocols such as TCP/IP and HTTP, where there is a strong bias *against* adding features (witness IPv6).
All these issues are hot topics within the standards organizations such as the
SNIA and
DMTF as well. Eight years later, the scope of resources that are able to be managed via a single protocol and common model has grown dramatically. The set of tools, mostly open source, to create solutions in this space is very impressive. What puzzles me is why anyone would re-invent all this infrastructure from scratch?
Mostly, the use of proprietary protocols and APIs is historic. They came first. SMI-S, like any other "check box" feature gets thought about later in the development. Because the vendors don't see it as "strategic", they only implement the minimum to pass the certification tests.
Once this gets established in a product line, it's difficult to switch things around, but there really is no excuse anymore to start a new product line with a proprietary API as the "primary" means of managing a resource. The standards can easily be extended to cover the whole functionality of any given product. By leveraging SNIA and DMTF profiles and protocols as the primary interface, the implementation becomes rich and robust because there is no other interface.
Some vendors do this today, but you'd never know it. What needs to happen is to have this become a differentiator between products, and get customers to ask for vendors to provide the full functionality through the standard-based interface. We really don't need to standardize any more features in order for this to take place. It's more of a messaging problem than a technical one.
SMI-S may never be "Done" as long as we keep innovating in the storage space, and other implementations drive a need for a common way to manage those features, but who cares? It's certainly complete enough to be the primary interface into your next storage purchase, if you call the vendor on it.