25 May

128 Technology: 128T Networking Platform

128 Technology: 128T Networking Platform


We’re proud to announce that tCognition has recently partnered with 128 Technology, Inc. (Burlington); the former founders of Acme Packet (now Oracle)!

128 Technology in a Nutshell

128 Technology understands that for many companies, the network is a core part of their business – and in some cases, the network is their core business. They have developed the game-changing and stateful 128T Networking Platform (128T), which uses a Secure Vector Routing architecture that exponentially improves enterprise application performance, Cloud (AWSAzureGoogle), Security & Identity Governance, and network simplification, all while reducing cost through the elimination of now unnecessary devices (i.e. load balancers, firewalls, etc.).

128 Technology’s vision for 128T is rooted in the five basic principles below:

IP networks should be session-aware

All meaningful IP services and applications are based on sessions – the two-way exchange of information between endpoints. A session-oriented perspective provides the basis for a fundamentally new way of building, optimizing, and securing networks with end-to-end, fine-grained control, and visibility.

Advanced network capabilities should not be standalone functions

Network functions such as firewalls, load balancers, and Wide Area Network (WAN) optimizers have some level of session-awareness, yet reside in multiple physical or virtual appliances that add to the complexity. Imbuing session awareness and control into the routing layer enables the consolidation of these functions, and makes them native to the act of routing.

Routing must evolve to be application and service-centric

The modern model for routing must evolve beyond simply IP addresses and cost-based forwarding to encompass the notions of service topologies and policy frameworks. Multi-tenant policy and control logic should exist within, not on top of, IP networks.

Overlay networks are not the answer

Encapsulation or tunnel-based overlay networks such as MPLS, IPSec, and VxLAN sit on top of IP networks in order to deliver deterministic routing, network virtualization, and segmentation. These techniques create overhead, fragmentation, operational costs, and scaling challenges – and limit the effectiveness of security and monitoring systems. Session-oriented networking offers a better alternative that stretches virtual networks end-to-end across network boundaries and domains.

Zero trust security must be everywhere

Perimeter security models are no longer sufficient for today’s business demands. Next-level network security requires that no user, traffic source, or connected network should be trusted. IP routing is no exception.

With these principles in mind, 128 Technology has developed a new kind of networking platform that addresses a broad range of networking challenges but is easy to implement alongside your existing network. They’re excited about this platform because it will deliver outstanding benefits to enterprises, service providers, and cloud services companies alike.

128T Networking Platform (128T) is a software-based platform that exponentially simplifies networking, reduces cost, and provides greater security. The session-oriented, service-centric, and deterministic policy engine enables faster route selection and bi-directional route enforcement through the use of a distributed control plane (vs. centralized controller), eliminating the need for tunnels, overlay networks, and segmentation, treating traffic flows in direct correlation to the established policy.

The CGN approach to networking configures end sites with private addresses, which in turn are translated to public addresses by NAT devices embedded in the network. The incorporation of CGN is similar to a tunnel header applied in multi-tenancy environments, and thus, application-level NAT problems are eliminated, as the source and destination addresses are translated back to the original addresses before delivery to the final destination. 128T is superior to current software-defined Wide Area Networking (SD-WAN) architectures and network functions virtualization because it eliminates complexity and reshapes the way organizations design, deploy, and operate real-world networks by making them dramatically simpler, smarter, and more secure.

Application in Financials and Retail

128T brings tremendous value to the Financial Services and Retail Industries, with a unique focus on the following use cases.


Zero Trust Security starting at the very edge of the network and extending across network boundaries; no packets enter the network unless there is an explicit policy allowing access.


Next Generation WAN (NG-WAN) with seamless failover, the ability to leverage public and private networks, and the need for more and lower cost bandwidth across networks.

Interconnecting Data Centers

To create one “logical” DC to the enterprise including Disaster Recovery with the support of duplicate IP addresses, and the ability to move services across networks.

For example, 128 Technology is currently working with a large financial software company that had experienced a session failure resulting in millions of dollars lost in trades. Session migration and session failover were a high priority for them; all resolved using 128T.

128T can also add enormous value to any retail organization by providing secure, efficient, and dynamic connections to retail locations. Through the NG-WAN platform, a large auto part retailer, for example, was able to connect over 4,000 sites countrywide. The primary driver for this retailer was 128T’s ability to provide dynamic failover of applications.

How tCognition Can Support 128 Technology

tCognition offers cost effective programs in support of advanced technologies like the 128T Networking Platform, providing Application Development & IntegrationQA-Test EngineeringHelp Desk (Level 1-3+), and 24×7 Managed Services all customized to meet the exacting requirements of our client’s needs.

We employ solution development and product support teams for Enterprise applications like NetSuiteOracleSAGE and SAP; monitoring and management tools like EM7, Nectar, and HP OpenView; secure mobile (iOS, Android, MS) application Single Sign-On (SSO) solutions for accessing ServiceNow, ERP and CRM platforms; Omni-Channel – WebRTC solution frameworks enabling browser based full collaboration communication; Telematics, connected vehicle solutions for Agero, vehicle manufacturers like Toyota and VW, and Insurance companies.

We look forward to working with and supporting 128 Technology in taking on the challenge of securing, controlling, and optimizing clients’ overly complex networks – and internetwork – architectures. Let us know how we can engage you in a discussion and show you how we can help deliver the highest level of security, control, and agility – along with 128 Technology!

13 Feb

AWS vs Oracle Cloud vs Azure: Price Comparison

AWS vs Oracle Cloud vs Azure: Price Comparison

IaaS Warzone: Amazon vs Oracle vs Microsoft

In response to Amazon Web Services growing appeal, Oracle recently announced big pricing changes in the way it would allow hosting of their products in AWS environments. CEO’s Larry Ellison (Oracle) and Jeff Bezos (Amazon) are now creating a tabloid war while competing with one another for cloud supremacy. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella has seemingly stayed out of the cloud war of words until this point, but we bet it is only a matter of time until Microsoft joins the fray. Compare Amazon AWS vs. Oracle Cloud from a cost perspective using this chart.

Differences in Cost Between AWS and Oracle Cloud:

AWS_vs_AzureTo this point, AWS is more affordable generally speaking than Oracle Cloud. In September 2016, Ellison declared Amazon’s lead in the public cloud had ended, but we are hedging our bets that it is smoke and mirrors. The Register recently reported that Oracle, “effectively doubles license fees to run its stuff in AWS”, which may be the wrong way Oracle makes good on their promises that their cloud will be faster and cheaper. The fact is, Amazon’s EC2 product is threatening Oracle’s core customer group – enterprise level businesses. In our opinion, Oracle seems to have a lot more catching up to do in both price and functionality before it can even hold a candle to Amazon.

Differences in Cost Between AWS vs Azure:

We find that Azure has a much more robust infrastructure than Oracle, and it makes a stronger apples-to-apples comparison. AWS has two core products: S3 and EC2. Similarly, Azure has two core options with Blob and Table.

Download AWS vs Oracle Price Comparison:

We created a downloadable, PDF price comparison chart demonstrating differences in AWS and Oracle cloud by region and server types. We compare support costs, redundancy pricing, and data transfer fees.

            Download: AWS vs. Oracle Guide

10 Jan

Cloud Pricing Comparison: AWS vs Azure

Cloud Pricing Comparison: AWS vs Azure

Cloud Pricing Comparison: AWS vs Azure

The most common pricing comparison we perform is between Amazon Web Services (AWS) vs. Azure as cloud consultants. In this blog, we outline some of the key pricing points between Amazon and Microsoft’s cloud hosting solutions. You can check out our in-depth pricing comparison chart between AWS and Azure at this link.

Both Amazon AWS and Microsoft Azure have two core product offerings. Amazon offers AWS Simple Storage Service (S3) and AWS Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2). Microsoft offers Azure Blob and Azure Table. There are other offerings for each product line, but this comparison focuses on the four core offerings: AWS S3, Azure Blob, AWS EC2 and Azure Table.


AWS Cloud Environments: S3 vs EC2

Storing over two trillion objects worldwide, Amazon S3 is the largest cloud server network ever assembled and comes at a much lower cost than EC2. S3 costs less than EC2 because it is not a structured environment. For most companies, S3 is powerful enough to store and deploy objects to the net. Only companies hosting structured applications and platforms (Linux, Windows, SQL) should consider hosting on EC2 over S3 from a cost perspective.

EC2 offers superior load-balancing flexibility and higher levels of redundancy over S3. Those looking at AWS EC2 should compare with Azure Table and vice versa. Those looking at AWS S3 should compare with Azure Blob and vice versa. For example, companies like Airbnb and Uber run their structured environments on EC2 environments.

Azure Cloud Environments: Blob vs Table

Azure Blob and Azure Table are the core cloud server environments offered by Microsoft. Blob provides object-based storage within an unstructured environment while Table is a structured environment. Azure users will consider Table over Blob when hosting Linux, Windows, and SQL (SQL Standard and SQL Online). Blob is used much more often for standard objects and files. Blob is thus priced at a much lower rate than Table. Like EC2, only those companies with application-based hosting environments should gravitate towards Table over Blob.

AWS S3 vs Azure Blob: Unstructured Environments

AWS S3 and Azure Blob are both unstructured hosting environments and are comparable products from a cost perspective. S3 and Blob are priced very similarly and offer comparable functionality. Some of the ways that Blob is more affordable than S3 is in data transfer costs. That being said, S3 has a lower cost for data redundancy and has a much larger worldwide infrastructure than Blob. On the low end of data usage (less than 50 TB), S3 has a higher cost in data storage than Blob, but this trend quickly reverses with the more data being used. In short, S3 is more affordable with larger amounts of data than Blob.

AWS EC2 vs Azure Table: Structured Environments

Both EC2 and Table offer structured data environments to develop on. Unlike Azure Table, Amazon’s EC2 is capable of balancing server loads and redundancy between all servers worldwide in realtime during any event of server downtime. This eliminates the need for data duplication and redundancy costs.

Unlike S3 and Blob, both EC2 and Azure most commonly host Linux, Windows and SQL environments. EC2’s data transfer costs are significantly higher than Table when transferring to the net, but EC2 carries a far lower redundancy cost than Blob. The lack of redundancy costs in EC2 typically more than makeup for the increase in the data transfer costs from Table.

Full AWS vs. Azure Comparison Chart:

           PDF Chart: AWS vs. Azure