Like many in the industry - although, perhaps, not that many - I was at NetWorld+Interop in Las Vegas for the last week in April. Among the countless meetings and chances to peek across the show floor, two panels were sandwiched in - both of which I had the privilege of moderating. One was about predictive technologies and the other on self-healing networks.

Both panels faced a similar set of questions - with some good, solid discussion points. For this and next week’s column, I thought I’d share some of highlights.

First, let me introduce the panelists, by company. For self-healing networks, they were:
* Aprisma Technologies
* Cisco
* NetQoS
* Packeteer
* Vieo

And for predictive technologies, they were:

* Entuity
* Micromuse
* NetScout
* Opnet
* SMARTS

The panels began with a definitional discussion - what do we (collectively and individually) believe “self-healing networks” and “predictive technologies” to be?

Virtually all of the panelists agreed on critical objectives for self-healing networks - such as supporting service levels more effectively, building redundancy into networks (or as Cisco would stress, more broadly, “resiliency”), and finding more ways to predict requirements and take automated actions. There was some real discussion around what constitutes “networks.” Generally, the panel felt strongly (Aprisma set the initial tone) that “networks” in this sense are no longer a Layer 1-3 discussion, but should ideally represent Layers 1-7 of the OSI stack, from physical transport through application. Why? Because in the end, a “self-healing” network without sensitivity to application performance issues can become a “who cares?” or even worse - a counterproductive overinvestment.

Someone in the audience suggested that this direction might be best called a “self-healing infrastructure.” This might suggest a new direction of growth for Interop overall - as the “networked infrastructure” redefines the meaning of “network.”

Within “Predictive Technologies,” the definitional discussion, not surprisingly, focused more on technologies per se. There was also more contention in the second panel among members, as many tended to answer in terms of their own technological investments.

However, one answer, from Opnet, posited two overall categories for “Predictive.” Using my own words, these are: pattern-recognition-related analyses primarily for diagnostics of problems before they occur; and multidimensional “what/if” analyses - for example, “Is my network ready for VoIP?” - to enable optimization, operational planning, business/service planning and business assessment. I believe these two categories do well as overall “submarkets,” with a very distinct set of technologies and benefits. This is true even if some vendors, such as NetQoS, address both types of conditions within a single suite.

Denise Dubie is senior editor with Network World.