www.brocade.com

FEDERAL NETWORKING SOLUTIONS

Modernizing U.S. Federal IT Networks to Reduce Cost and Complexity; Driving $5B in Savings Over the Next Five Years

WHITE PAPER

Investing in the transformation of federal networks today can dramatically save time and money—now and in the future.

1

By segment, the U.S. federal government is the world’s largest consumer of Information Technology (IT). In Fiscal Year 2013, the federal government plans to spend $78.9 billion on IT, as reported by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). When including embedded IT equipment for major defense programs, the annual IT budget rises to $112.5 billion.

These budgets are for government systems ranging from simple Web access to complex weapons systems and Command Control and Communications platforms. Despite substantial funding, the federal government is still struggling to keep up with the explosion in modern technology primarily due to constrained budgets, sequestration, and extended certification and accreditation processes. The result is outdated IT infrastructure that is complex and costly to maintain and support. The infrastructure is burdened with proprietary protocols and not up to the IT challenges being demanded by today’s agency mission requirements. Federal networks face the same challenges.

This paper describes two of the most important steps that federal IT policy and budgetary stakeholders—and agency program and acquisition officials—can take to reduce costs while modernizing IT network infrastructure:

• Modernize networks to better interoperate with cloud-based resources, support greater mobility, and reduce ongoing operational costs. This means getting out from under proprietary standards and moving toward open standards-based heterogeneous networks designed for virtualization and the cloud.

• Break the near-monopoly of a single-vendor homogenous environment for critical networking equipment. By doing so, the federal government could realize billions of dollars in savings.

While federal IT professionals attempt to optimize their IT networks and data centers, changes in policies and regulations are needed to enforce key IT initiatives. Some of these changes could include the Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA) and the OMB’s budget guidance and executive mandates.

In particular, avoiding a single-vendor approach to IT can be a good way to reap immediate benefits. According to Gartner research1, the introduction of a second vendor into the network reduces the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) by 15 to 25 percent over a five-year period. It also decreases the overall complexity because this approach facilitates more standardization in the network architecture.

1 Gartner Research, Debunking the Myth of the Single-Vendor Network, November 2010.

2

Based on primary research conducted by Gartner and MeriTalk, and validated by specific Brocade customer experiences, networking vendor Brocade can demonstrate how the federal government could save an estimated $5 billion over five years simply by implementing the following steps:

1. Moving from single-supplier to multivendor heterogeneous networks 2. Reducing or eliminating the use of proprietary protocols3. Embracing open standards-based network design and implementation4. Defining requirements in terms of features, functions, and capabilities without regard

to a particular vendor5. Using full and open competition for IT acquisitions

Especially during a time of budgetary concerns and reductions in discretionary spending, federal IT and program managers are being forced to do more with less. According to the OMB, IT Hardware represents 20 percent of the total IT spend (see Figure 1). This is 15 to 20 percent lower than commercial best practices of 35 to 40 percent. Due to the escalating cost of Enterprise License Agreements (ELAs), much of the hardware acquisition budget is being used for annual hardware maintenance contracts. As a result, the federal government is spending only 10 to 15 percent of the total IT budget on new hardware and technology— just one-third of what is recommended by commercial best practices.

The CurrenT STaTe of federal neTworkS: new requiremenTS

demand a new approaChToday, a large portion of federal government networks are designed around proprietary protocols. These protocols are supported by only one vendor, which often leads to standardization on that particular vendor. In fact, the federal government spends 83 percent of its network budget on a single vendor. A typical procurement practice is to complete a Justification and Approval for Other Than Full and Open Competition, which ultimately eliminates free and open competition—with the government paying a premium to ensure that it gets the specified vendor. Another common procurement practice is to designate “Brand Name or Equal” and then include specifications that are unique to, or proprietary to, a particular vendor. In either case, the taxpayer loses and the federal government gets less value for its money.

Unfortunately, these practices continue even in a time when technology innovation is occurring at an unprecedented pace. Computing has entered a new age characterized by the separation of users from data, separation of data from applications, and separation of applications from infrastructure. In turn, the network has become the computer.

Users demand mobility and timely deployment of new applications, as well as access to their data anytime, anywhere in a secure, reliable manner. These demands are further complicated by the rapid growth of mobile and network-enabled devices that are driving the continued explosive growth of information and data. However, federal agency budgets simply can’t keep pace with these demands.

figure 1. Federal IT spending

according to the Office of Management and Budget.

IT Services

52.5%20.7%

15.6%

11.2%

Software Products

IT Hardware

Communications and Network Services

Federal IT Spending According to the Office of Management and Budget

3

Management wants IT cost reductions and shared, energy-efficient environments from online cloud services and consolidated data centers providing shared information, applications, and services. IT organizations need an infrastructure that is reliable, scalable, and secure. They require network infrastructure solutions that are easy to implement and support in order to save time and money. It all points to the need for faster, more agile, and more economical networks.

how neTworkS evolved To where They are TodayBefore exploring how to deliver faster, more agile, and more economical networks, it helps to understand the current state of federal networks. The design and architecture of these networks began over two decades ago, following industry trends and architectures based on:

• Terminal and printer access to mainframes

• Shared printing and file services for PCs

• Interconnecting servers and storage in data centers

• Connecting PCs to data centers and data centers to other data centers

• Enabling remote access to data centers and applications

As a result of this gradual evolution, today’s federal networks have typically become overly complex, representing multiple hierarchical networks that are interconnected. Independently, the networks are characterized by three major layers: access, aggregation, and core. These networks were designed to support traffic and data flows that were primarily “north to south” (see Figure 2) where information flowed periodically as data was processed and then stored locally in a distributed environment.

As a result, today’s network architectures are typically:

• Complex and duplicative

• Costly to acquire as well as expensive to operate and maintain

• Outdated and lacking the bandwidth to support emerging requirements

• Rigid and laden with proprietary protocols

• Not competitive, and lacking of innovation

• Insufficiently secure in the face of today’s growing cyber threats

• Not capable of meeting current and future mission objectives

figure 2. The traditional network architecture model consisting of three tiers with information flowing from North to South.

n

S

Data Flow

4

According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), of the $79 billion federal agencies budgeted for IT in 2011, $54 billion (about 69 percent) was reported to have been spent on just the operations and maintenance of existing legacy IT systems—commonly referred to as Steady State investments.2

Given the size and magnitude of these investments, it is essential that agencies effectively manage them to ensure they continue to meet agency needs. As such, U.S. Chief Information Officer (CIO) Steven VanRoekel and the OMB have directed agencies to periodically examine the performance of such investments against, among other things, established cost, schedule, and performance goals by performing annual operational analyses.

The high CoSTS of mainTaining and SupporTing proprieTary legaCy SySTemSBrocade has taken the concept of these operational analyses even further, exploring IT investments specifically in the area of network infrastructure, operations support, and maintenance costs over the past seven years (see Figure 3). This data demonstrates that from fiscal years 2007 through 2013, the federal government spent an estimated $26.9 billion on networks, including support and maintenance. Consistent with the GAO analysis, 83 percent of the budget is used to support a single network vendor, reinforcing the case that an overwhelming portion of IT spending goes to operations and maintenance of outdated legacy environments.

This pattern of IT spending is self-fulfilling and perpetuates the problem. It has created an acquisition dilemma for agencies that are under increasing pressure to save money and do more with less. They are faced with the decision of sustaining their current IT operations versus investing in new applications and services to support citizens and warfighters.

The dilemma for federal IT professionals is the trade-off in using funding for Development, Modernization, and Enhancements (DME) to supplement “Steady State” funding that supports ongoing operations of existing legacy IT network infrastructure. Brocade’s experience shows that most agencies are struggling to cover the cost of ongoing sustainment, including annual maintenance contracts, training requirements, and forced technology refreshes due to End of Life (EOL) and End of Support (EOS) of aging legacy infrastructure.

2 Agencies Need to Strengthen Oversight of Billions of Dollars in Operations and Maintenance Investments GAO-13-87, Oct. 16, 2012.

figure 3. U.S. federal government spending

in the past seven years.

In the past 7 years

$26.9 billion was spent on

Networking Products 0

.5

1.0

FY07

FY08

FY09

FY10

FY11

FY12

FY13

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

Single Vendor (legacy) $22.4$4.5All other networking vendors

4.0

Vendor

FISCAL YEAR

BILL

ION

($)

7 year total(in billion)

Grand Total: $26.9 billion

U.S. Federal Government Networking Product Revenue Spend

5

As a result, Brocade estimates that only 10 to 20 percent of the budget is actually spent on new network infrastructure solutions. In contrast, typical commercial enterprises spend 65 to 70 percent on OpEx (Steady State) and 30 to 35 percent on CapEx (DME) based on Gartner research. In other words, commercial enterprises are spending a significantly higher portion of their IT budgets on new technology than their counterparts in the federal government.

The dilemma for federal contracting professionals is the trade-off in using full and open competition for simplified, less-costly, and timelier acquisitions with limited competition. Most IT acquisition requests are brand-specific or mention a single vendor, and many have Sole Source or Limited Source Justifications based on the need to support outdated proprietary legacy networks and IT infrastructure. These procurements are perceived to be easier to evaluate and therefore less costly in terms of acquisition time and money in the short term. But in the long run, they are driving up IT costs and creating greater dependency on legacy infrastructure due to a lack of innovation and competition.

Federal IT policy reflects the need to overcome these trends. The Federal CIO council and the OMB strongly emphasize greater spending on innovation, paid for by reductions in operating expenses (see Figure 4). The Federal IT Agenda is comprised of four major areas to provide new and enhanced services, reduce costs, protect critical information, and increase innovation to create jobs and stimulate the economy. These four priorities include:

• Building a 21st century government

• Maximizing value/reducing costs

• Improving cyber security

• Meeting national initiatives

At the core of all of these priorities is the opportunity to transform the federal IT infrastructure to do more with less. This concept was first signaled in December 2010 with the 25-Point Implementation Plan to Reform Federal Information Technology Management.3 This plan described the need to bring more modularity, agility, and competition into large-scale systems development. It also introduced the Federal Data Center Consolidation Initiative (FDCCI). Consolidation, if done according to best practices, gives agencies the opportunity to optimize the consolidated infrastructure. And that, in turn, could mean moving away from the single-vendor, high-cost infrastructures that characterize so many federal data centers today.

Agency Technology

Transformation

Managing Data Not

Infrastructure

Increasing Efficiency

Reducing Acquisition

Costs

Administration Policy• Cloud First

• Data Center Consolidation

• Shared First

• Strategic Sourcing

• Mobile Strategy

• Digital Strategy

• Big Data R&D

Enterprise Services

Accelerated Innovation

figure 4. The key strategies for transforming agencies’ IT infrastructure

3 The plan is archived at www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/digital-strategy/25-point-implementation-plan-to-reform-federal-it.pdf.

6

The 2012 digital government strategy, Building a 21st Century Platform to Better Serve the American People, further emphasized the need for more efficient networks as platforms for delivering the next generation of applications that leverage the cloud and mobility. Within that document there are numerous references to saving on infrastructure so there’s more budget available for new technology, the OpEx-versus-CapEx discussion.4

This approach strives to maximize value by calling for increased oversight and reporting. It also encourages agencies to share first to increase efficiencies, transition to open standards such as IPv6, and leverage more energy-efficient technologies. It focuses on the importance of cyber security and national initiatives to protect national interests. The FDCCI itself talks about this directly: “The challenge remains to balance additional business requirements for technology with an overall strategy of reducing IT operational costs.”5 The initiative lists, as a specific goal, reducing spending on data center hardware, software, and operations.

new prioriTieS demand nexT-generaTion neTworkSGartner and MeriTalk both recommend that federal IT professionals implement the following best practices to increase competition, build heterogeneous networks, and reduce the cost of hardware acquisition:

• Ensure that agencies use open standards as much as possible, especially interfaces between building blocks within the network

• Have well-defined boundaries around any new solution, often taking advantage of the concept of network building blocks to define major components in the network (for instance, edge switching, core switching, and WAN routing are often considered building blocks in an enterprise network)

• Regularly engage in network “hygiene” activities to ensure that old pre-standard or proprietary protocols are reduced or eliminated from use in the network

The out-of-proportion spending on expensive and proprietary network equipment is driving agencies to do more than simply keep their networks running. They are compelled by a number of factors to not only lower costs but also to improve bandwidth, reliability, manageability, and security. Among the elements driving these imperatives are:

• an unprecedented fiscal situation: For the first time, federal IT budgets are not growing, even as demands of whole new programs—from implementation of the Affordable Care Act to open data policy—require improved networks.

• high expectations for iT: Agencies are moving fast to incorporate mobility and cloud computing, both of which create new and more technically challenging demands on networks.

• The high stakes of national security, critical infrastructure, intellectual property, and privacy: Cyber threats are morphing into advanced persistent threats, and agencies must convert from auditing to continuous real-time monitoring.

• The explosive growth of data: Big Data is fast moving from theory to practice in a variety of federal domains, from anti-fraud efforts at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, to analyzing unstructured metadata for national security threats.

• The widening adoption of Software as a Service (SaaS): As agencies seek to escape cumbersome enterprise licenses in exchange for easily scaled and descaled subscription models that increase agility, SaaS places new demands on networks and applications.

4 White House, Digital Government: Building a 21st Century Platform to Better Serve the American People www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/egov/digital-government/digital-government-strategy.pdf

5 OPM Final Data Center Consolidation Plan, September 2011 archive.opm.gov/cio/newsandevents/OPM%20FDCCI%20Plan.pdf

7

Moreover, most ongoing efforts to improve federal agency performance have networked systems at their foundations. In July 2013, for example, the White House announced it would be crafting Version 2 of its Open Government Strategy. The first version, dating to September 2011, involved network-based strategies including online spending accountability, online citizen petitioning, and improving online citizen services. Development of the follow-on plan itself is a network-based activity, relying on social media in several formats.

Even with these new activities, on budgetary matters, agencies find themselves under a microscope. Several OMB initiatives look inward at agency performance. The PortfolioStat sessions examine agencies’ IT spending priorities with the bundle of projects they have underway. The TechStat sessions seek to improve or eliminate significantly late or overly expensive projects. Both initiatives seek better overall returns on IT investments.

The Time for real neTwork TranSformaTionWith more than 80 percent of federal network equipment spending going to a single network vendor leveraging proprietary protocols, it’s not surprising that too many federal IT networks are operating at sub-optimal levels. This represents a significant category of IT spending—networking infrastructure and its associated software—where acquisition and operating expenses are wasting already-limited funding. Based on Brocade analysis, federal agencies are on track to spend billions more than they would need to over the next five years.

That’s primarily because federal network infrastructure has been dominated by one brand/vendor. Industry data demonstrates that, of the estimated $4 billion spent annually on network infrastructure, 83 percent (see Figure 5) is monopolized by one brand/vendor.6 This dominance and bias restricts competition and limits innovation. And it means continued reliance on proprietary, sub-optimal networks thanks to single-vendor lock-in.

US Federal Government Network Maintenance Services Spend

Vendor FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13Grand Total

Single Vendor (legacy) 81% 81% 81% 84% 85% 85% 84% 83%

All Other Network Vendors Combined

19% 19% 19% 16% 15% 15% 16% 17%

Grand Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

The True CoST of proprieTary neTworkSAt the highest level, the most fundamental problem faced by federal agencies continues to be the 70 to 80 percent sustainment costs associated with the people and processes employed simply to maintain existing systems. Why are these costs so high? The answer lies at the design “birth” of these systems, at which time the necessities and pressures of meeting mission requirements persuaded planners to “standardize” upon single vendors across functional core and enterprise-wide environments. Those decisions set in motion a complex, proprietary, and constrained collection of practices based on the products, features, limitations, and pricing models of a single vendor. As a result, entire contractor and government support organizations became virtual extensions of the specified vendor’s business model for many years.

A single brand vendor comprised 83% of the total budget for Network Maintenance Services

figure 5. U.S. federal government network maintenance spending.

6 Based on industry data, reported results assembled by Brocade in January 2013.

8

Even today, there is often the same “standardization” justification for single-vendor or brand-specific acquisitions. “Single pane of glass” and “common interface” have become shorthand reasons for building the same monolithic, expensive, and proprietary networks that will ultimately consume more budget and more staff hours while delivering sub-optimal results. Today, acquisition and technical groups tend to focus almost exclusively on the initial competitive hardware purchase. It is rare that any group within an agency thoroughly evaluates the long-term costs that accrue over time (see Figure 6). To underscore this problem, a MeriTalk survey of 220 federal IT managers revealed that three out of four agencies specify a brand in their agency’s IT procurements and 65 percent specify a brand to ensure compatibility with existing infrastructure.7

Unfortunately, proprietary architectures tend to be rigid and product-centered, rather than data- and application-centered. This flies in the face of the emerging IT model characterized by cloud-based data resources and light applications running on mobile clients.

Moreover, proprietary networks are, and always have been, expensive to maintain, support, and recapitalize. In fact, in the Gartner report, Debunking the Myth of the Single-Vendor Network, respondents noted capital cost reductions of 30 to 50 percent (compared to competitive bids from Cisco) when they introduced a second vendor into their infrastructures.8

Proprietary networks also increase costs because they can trap agencies into expensive maintenance and support contracts. Network complexity itself brings still more cost. Although it might seem contrary to expectations, research shows that multivendor, standards-based networks can actually simplify networks. In the Gartner study, organizations gained simplification because the multivendor networks tended to be made of interoperable components based on the same open standards—and they observed savings ranging from 40 percent to 95 percent compared to what they previously paid for Cisco’s Smartnet services.9

In spite of these contradictions, many agencies continue to trap themselves into high equipment acquisition and maintenance costs by choosing one vendor and directly or indirectly specifying that vendor in requirements with terms such as “Brand X equivalent” or “Brand X compatible.” This approach can circumvent the Sole-Source Justification process and provide the appearance of competition.

However, if these solutions were truly standards-based IT commodities, there should be no need to state a vendor preference in any requirement. This behavior perpetuates the dependence on, and therefore the costs of, proprietary networks by failing to recognize that network IT staff can easily be trained and certified on open standards to diversify the enterprise network.

7 MeriTalk, Infrastructure Independence, Set My IT Free, March 2013.8 Gartner Research, Debunking the Myth of the Single-Vendor Network, November 2010.9 Ibid.

Hardware Selection Is Operational Destiny

SustainingCosts

Program Lifecycle

Managing 20+ different deployed devices fulfilling the same network function

Use of proprietary protocols, limiting competition and functionality

Dozens of different software versions across same requirement

Unplanned events (e.g., IAVA, EoL/EoS) requiring a new acquisition effort before the duty cycle is achieved

Sparing, Tier 1, 2 Support, and Software Update Costs

figure 6. The growing costs of proprietary

environments.

9

Lastly, most other areas of IT infrastructure have evolved to open standards in the last few decades. Witness, for instance, the transformation in computing from mainframes to mini-computers and client/servers to today’s era of cloud computing. While each stage led to significant progress and cost reduction, none would have happened without the first step of moving to open, non-proprietary standards. IT administrators are now realizing that without a similar change in networking, the overall productivity of IT will suffer.

In short, by modernizing their network infrastructures, agencies can get away from vendor or OEM-equivalent dependencies in favor of open, interoperable, standards-based network equipment. As a result, they can reduce complexity, increase agility, and take advantage of a wider range of innovative tools for monitoring and managing their networks.

Building The 21ST CenTury neTworkWhile open standards play a significant role in promoting competition, they have done so primarily in the context of “like or equal” from an acquisition perspective. Brocade believes the best approach is deeper than the “product” level and ultimately far more strategic. The 21st century network will need to utilize industry best practices to improve mission effectiveness, increase operational efficiency, and improve agency agility. It will do so by leveraging the cloud, virtualization, and open standards to:

• Flatten network architectures

• Deploy “soft” switches

• Increase network bandwidth

• Build virtualization-aware networks

• Support greater mobility and modern applications

To achieve these goals, federal IT professionals, program managers, and planners will need to:

• Avoid proprietary network protocols in favor of open standard protocols, where available, for open competition

• Utilize repeatable solution sets, thereby removing the costly need to engineer, source, support, and sustain multiple configurations of a base requirement (such as an edge switch) when a single configuration will suffice

• Move to thin clients and higher-level protocols, thereby reducing both the cost of equipment and the IT resources needed to support it in the field

The Brocade Approach: A Data-Centric ModelOpen Systems, Software-Defined Networking, and Network Analytics

End User Satisfaction

Provisioning Software-defined Networking OpenFlow Open Source

Effectiveness

Agile Tools Vendor Tools

IT EFFICIENCY

IT Infrastructure

High-level Orchestration Tools

figure 7. The Brocade data-centric approach to open, efficient networking.

10

Moving to open standards with repeatable solution sets and higher-level protocols can help agencies:

• Simplify: Flatten the network architecture and automate it, resulting in less complexity, reduced training costs, and less personnel required for support.

• leverage: Virtualize network functions, providing end-to-end operational provisioning, visibility, and control.

• innovate: Use new technologies such as OpenStack, Software-Defined Networking (SDN) via OpenFlow, and sFlow to further reduce complexity and increase security to protect against cyber threats.

TranSform your neTwork now: why waiT? The longer you delay, The more you waSTeThe next generation of federal networks must break with the past, changing from proprietary to open, from costly to efficient, and from rigid to agile.

According to the Gartner research, agencies could save between 15 and 25 percent on TCO by adding another vendor (see Figure 8). This debunks many myths associated with training and talent, interoperability, complexity, staffing, equipment, maintenance cost, and network management.10 Conservatively, based on the estimated annual $6.4 billion in network spending, the federal government could save $1 billion annually and $5 billion over the next five years simply by introducing an additional vendor.

The federal government could save $1 billion annually and $5 billion over the next five years simply by introducing an additional vendor.

Potential Government Savings (in Billions)

Technology Segment 2012Potential %

Savings (Min)Potential %

Savings (Max)

Annual Potential $

Savings (Min)

Annual Potential $

Savings (Max)

IT Hardware and Equipment $2.94 20% 40% $0.59 $1.18

IT Services: Annual Maintenance

$0.74 25% 70% $0.19 $0.52

Communications and Network Services

$2.73 10% 20% $0.27 $0.55

Annual Savings (Dollars) $6.42 $1.05 $2.24

Annual Savings (Percentage) 16% 35%

MeriTalk’s recent study Infrastructure Independence, Set My IT Free concluded that 95 percent of federal IT professionals believe there are benefits to using more than one vendor in their IT infrastructures. On average, the 220 professionals surveyed estimated that they could save 20 percent of their annual budget by adding a second vendor—that adds up to $15.8 billion government-wide. In addition, 44 percent of multivendor agencies that also use network management tools say that diversification increases network performance. The study also determined that freeing IT pays off, as 94 percent of agencies that are infrastructure-independent say they have saved money by using multiple vendors.11

Organizations did noT need additional staff to manage a

dual-vendor network, and the ToTal initial capital

costs and ongoing maintenance expenses of the environment are higher in a single-

vendor network

figure 8. Government Fiscal Year 2012 estimated

IT network spending and potential savings.

10 Gartner Research, Debunking the Myth of the Single-Vendor Network, November 2010.11 MeriTalk, Infrastructure Independence, Set My IT Free, March 2013.

11

As noted earlier, by implementing the recommendations of Garter and MeriTalk, the federal government could reduce its IT budget by 20 to 25 percent with relatively little investment. Over a five-year period, this could result in $5.2 to $11.2 billion in savings.

ConCluSion: how To diverSify and TranSform your neTworkThe transformation of the network begins with leadership. It requires action, accountability, and authority to break with the past and usher in change. It might require executive orders, policy changes, regulatory reform, and enforcement. The Federal CIO council, under direction of U.S. Federal CIO Steven VanRoekel and the OMB, is providing agencies guidance on how to increase efficiency and reduce IT costs.

For example, Roger W. Baker, Former Assistant Secretary for Information and Technology as well as CIO for the Department of Veterans Affairs, demonstrated exceptional leadership with an agency-wide mandate in a memo titled VA: Open Standard Protocols for VA Networks in August 2012.12 The key statements included the following:

• This memo codifies the decision to migrate from proprietary protocols to open standard protocols on VA’s data networks, in order to enable participation from any vendor.

• Migrating to open standard protocols supports cost containment strategies, and will increase VA’s flexibility and ability to interoperate with multiple vendors.

• Leaders in new technologies are constantly changing—improved interoperability, innovation, and open competition will enable rapid advances in network infrastructure capabilities at the lowest possible costs.

Recently, a measure to reduce waste in government IT spending by increasing the budget authority of federal CIOs and to change IT procurement was added as an amendment to the Defense Authorization Bill on June 14, 2013. The Federal IT Procurement Reform Act (FITARA), which was co-sponsored by Representatives Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) and passed by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in March, was added to the Defense bill on a voice vote, along with a number of other bipartisan measures.13 FITARA updates the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996, which itself was passed as a section of a Defense authorization bill.

12 Veterans Affairs CIO Memorandum August 2012 iehrsummit.dsigroup.org/breaking-news/?goback=%2Egde_4115936_member_14997651513 H.R. 1232, the Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA), Amendment to H.R. 1960, FY2014 NDAA) June 2013.

Technology and Policy Directives Shape PrioritiesBudget

Cloud Computing

Data Center Consolidation

FITARA

Low Price Technically Acceptable

(LPTA)

Strategic Sourcing

PortfolioStat2.0

Big Data

Cybersecurity

Open Data MobilityDigital

Strategy

IT Market Catalysts figure 9.

Technology and policy directives shape priorities.

12

This is a call to action for agencies and requires them to take the following IT acquisition actions to save billions in IT spending:

• Agencies need to adopt and mandate the use of open standards and open protocols wherever possible, restricting the use of proprietary protocols for new IT and network infrastructure investments.

• Agencies need to define requirements in terms of features, functions, and service levels absent of brand name requirements in requests for quotes and proposals, RFQs, and RFPs.

In developing their IT requirements, agencies should envision an end state characterized by:

• Simplicity, with a flatter architecture. Greater automation of monitoring, load balancing, and provisioning reduces the need for human intervention.

• Agility, with virtualized switching and routing tables handling loads drawing on virtualized storage. Network virtualization enables more efficient use of cloud storage by making the remaining element in the IT chain highly portable.

• High visibility and manageability, using standards-based technology such as sFlow. Brocade, for example, has a ten-year history of sFlow development, resulting in a set of tools for seeing deeply into network traffic and avoiding problems before they develop into performance bottlenecks—all tuned for virtualized environments.

• A strategic approach, rather than a product- or vendor-oriented approach. This means building large and scalable systems at lower cost, with interoperable network elements based on open standards and application programming interfaces.

With these qualities embedded in the next generation of networks, federal agencies will have the performance they need to support new and emerging service requirements—and the money they need to introduce real innovation into their processes and missions.

The use of open industry standards and multivendor networks by federal agencies will reduce costs, increase competition, promote innovation, facilitate interoperability, and provide greater overall ROI. It lowers the barriers to entry and exit while building the 21st century network. The federal government can send a powerful signal to the IT industry that it values innovation and competition. Moreover, it will signal to the taxpayer that it is serious about reducing waste and saving billions of dollars. Doing so will ultimately benefit the U.S. economy by encouraging continued investment in R&D, placing value on intellectual property, and creating IT sector jobs.

Learn more at www.brocade.com/federal.

The federal government can send a powerful signal

to the IT industry that it values innovation and

competition.

www.brocade.com

aBouT BroCadeBrocade networking solutions help the world’s leading organizations transition smoothly to a world where applications and information reside anywhere. Innovative Ethernet, storage, and software networking solutions reduce complexity and costs while enabling virtualization and cloud computing to increase operational agility. To help ensure a complete solution, Brocade partners with world-class IT companies and provides comprehensive education, support, and professional services offerings.

© 2013 Brocade Communications Systems, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 07/13 GA-WP-1790-00

ADX, AnyIO, Brocade, Brocade Assurance, the B-wing symbol, DCX, Fabric OS, ICX, MLX, MyBrocade, OpenScript, VCS, VDX, and Vyatta are registered trademarks, and HyperEdge, The Effortless Network, and The On-Demand Data Center are trademarks of Brocade Communications Systems, Inc., in the United States and/or in other countries. Other brands, products, or service names mentioned may be trademarks of their respective owners.

Notice: This document is for informational purposes only and does not set forth any warranty, expressed or implied, concerning any equipment, equipment feature, or service offered or to be offered by Brocade. Brocade reserves the right to make changes to this document at any time, without notice, and assumes no responsibility for its use. This informational document describes features that may not be currently available. Contact a Brocade sales office for information on feature and product availability. Export of technical data contained in this document may require an export license from the United States government.

WHITE PAPER