& cplSiteName &
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View        ADD A COMMENT
nasimson
50%
50%
nasimson,
User Rank: Light Sabre
6/29/2015 | 11:13:57 AM
Telco 2.0
@ Dan:

What a refreshing piece this is! We are yet to see Telco 2.0, with a few exceptions here and there.

I believe telcom executive would not transform telecom companies. It will be seasoned IT pros in board positions and top mgmt positions who will get the honor to do this much needed job.
MordyK
50%
50%
MordyK,
User Rank: Light Sabre
6/16/2015 | 4:58:01 PM
Re: Culture is only one part of the problem
Great points Seven! The article mentions another aspect which is the separation of the culture of applications from that of networks, to enable a more flexible development approach not hindered by the network side. While I agree with this in general, a complete separation can also have negative effects, as applications can gain tremendous value by minor adjustments to the network that have zero effect on the network but tremendous value for an app. So its important that the felxibility mindset trickle into the network as well.

I look at AT&T's successful foundry and see this very issue prominently. They pretty much hand you a network and say ignore what you can do within the network but see what you can build on top of it, and when they do allow you to tinker with the network its super high requirements software only like like Intucell's SON but no actual deployment adjustments.

If they want to be true innovative players like Google and Facebook, they need to think like them and innovate throughout their entire stack, instead of relying on their vendor community to define vanilla networks.

This critic is largely focused on the american and european carriers, as many of the asian carriers are more creative.

 
mendyk
50%
50%
mendyk,
User Rank: Light Sabre
6/16/2015 | 4:40:28 PM
Re: Culture is only one part of the problem
I agree that some of this feels like we're strapping an engine to horse and calling it a car. In making the case for virtualization, maybe there's a little too much conflation of objectives going on. The network gear heads need to understand why virtualization matters from a network operation and performance standpoint. Those points are often buried by all the stuff about business transformation and the like. That's not to minimize the importance of BT, but keeping the network running and making it better are certainly no less important.
jabailo
50%
50%
jabailo,
User Rank: Light Sabre
6/16/2015 | 1:39:21 PM
App will drive network
Exactly right...the days of a company "laying track" and then letting devs fill it up is over.  Now every app is an off road SUV, making a trail wherever it goes.

So if you're not laying tracks, what does a network company do?  Maybe it's more about application support.  Opitimization help.  Monitoring...

 

 
brooks7
50%
50%
brooks7,
User Rank: Light Sabre
6/16/2015 | 12:40:13 PM
Culture is only one part of the problem
Essentially, you have problems in MANY areas:

1 - Skill Set:  How many telco guys are familiar with IT systems.  I harp on this a lot on the boards here as many technical problems with virtualization have been overcome in the Enterprise IT world.  Some may apply to Telcos, many will not.  But who is studying why people use some Open Source and yet spend a boatload on VMware?

2 - Spending Patterns:  Virtualization at the Enterprise level did not happen in one fell swoop and generally did not need to happen at any given time at a large scale.  Many applications within Telecom require quite large deployments in order to do something other than a bulk replacement of what is already there.  How can carriers match spending to employ new technologies in a way that they don't have to redo their entire network to offer a single new service?

3 - Stability:  I want to put a word of caution here.  We are all making an assumption that supporting this kind of new network will cost the same or less than existing ones. Why do we think that?  I know there is all this talk about 5 9s but there is a cost to trying to diagnose and fix things. Virtualization makes some of it easy - just spin up a new instance and tear down the old one. But service interruptions on mission critical services is going to be interesting.  Let me use an example, who here thinks Email was designed by the IETF to be a real time data transmission scheme with essentially 100% reliability?

4 - Culture:  The problem here to me is top down.  I used to ask how many video games we think Ed Whitacker used to play online for a bit of humor.  But this is a real problem.  The networks being designed by the Googles/Facebooks/Amazons of the world are being done mostly by people with a very open viewpoint (i.e. they are young).  How do the dinosaurs of telco folks compete with that?

5 - Employee Education:  So, how many people think unionized labor with a High School Diploma is going to work as installation and support folks in this new world?

Note:  None of the things I have posted are directly related to technology choices.

seven

 


Featured Video
Flash Poll
Upcoming Live Events
September 17-19, 2019, Dallas, Texas
October 1-2, 2019, New Orleans, Louisiana
October 10, 2019, New York, New York
October 22, 2019, Los Angeles, CA
November 5, 2019, London, England
November 7, 2019, London, UK
December 3, 2019, New York, New York
December 3-5, 2019, Vienna, Austria
March 16-18, 2020, Embassy Suites, Denver, Colorado
May 18-20, 2020, Irving Convention Center, Dallas, TX
All Upcoming Live Events