& cplSiteName &
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View        ADD A COMMENT
9/3/2016 | 3:43:59 PM
Re: Controller vs. EMS/NMS
http://www.utroqueconsulting.com/ "A controller is distinct from a standard Network Management System (NMS) in several ways, many of which are subtle – which has allowed multiple vendors to simply re-brand the NMS as a controller without implementing any significant changes. The biggest difference, one that is not covered by most NMSs, is that a controller must be open to multiple vendors. While some network vendors in the past have claimed an open NMS, the reality has been less than optimal. A truly open controller should be able to quickly and easily integrate systems from mulitple vendors without significant loss of functijonality. Standards like YANG data models should go a long way towards meeting this goal, but it will be the business issues that will determine the long term viability"
9/2/2016 | 6:58:46 PM
Re: Controller vs. EMS/NMS
Architecturaly - a  NMS should be NB of a controller, and this is where users explress their intent (AKA business logic), controller would be the glue/compiler/your favorite term to instantiate networking based on the intent expressed. SBI's used don't really define the name, ability to use many different SBI's wihout need to change user's intent shows proper implementation.

Hope this helps,

Sterling Perrin
Sterling Perrin
9/2/2016 | 10:54:52 AM
Controller vs. EMS/NMS
<repackaged versions of their Network Management Systems which are based on an older style of proprietary software>

This is an interesting comment and seems to be the main argument that that many vendors are using against their competitors.

Ciena itself used this same argument in a recent interview to attack their competitors (not against Infinera though, as they hadn't announced product yet.)

In my research I am trying to define what exactly separates an SDN controller from a next gen NMS platform. So far I haven't gotten a clear distinction. SW that only supports new interfaces is a clear controller. Something that is 100% proprietary and only handles legacy CLI, SNMP is NMS. But what about SW that has new and legacy interface support? I've seen demonstrations of SW that automates legacy CLI, for example. I welcome any thoughts on this topic - there is a lot of confusion right now.


Featured Video
Upcoming Live Events
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
November 14, 2019, Maritim Hotel, Berlin
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
Partner Perspectives - content from our sponsors
Edge Computing, the Next Great IT Revolution
By Rajesh Gadiyar, Vice President & CTO, Network & Custom Logic Group, Intel Corp
Innovations in Home Media Terminals for the Upcoming 5G Era
By Tang Wei, Vice President, ZTE Corporation
All Partner Perspectives