Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Solution63465 5/19/2017 | 4:24:02 PM
Metaphors I really liked the article and whatever points were being made-

Except for one- Is is necessary to use the term "boner" in the writing?

Perhaps there are some readers who cannot relate to that experience.

Way to alienate approx 50% of the working population...no?



kq4ym 5/13/2017 | 2:19:46 PM
Re: Excellent Article As noted, "standards, certification and interoperability" are the keys to making it all work. And it will be interesting to watch as APIs are developed and especially to see how the standardization of certification fees may work out to get a level playing field here too.
Tomasz Stepniak 5/7/2017 | 12:32:06 PM
Long way to go... I can see three major risks:

1. Security

2. Security

3. Vendor push back as the vendor-lock is very convenient to reduce all operational risks. 
RMersh 5/5/2017 | 3:36:43 PM
Standards, Interop, OS, migration and the business end of NFV So where do I start.....

First, I do appreciate the thought that has gone into both of the articles you have posted on the relationship between OS and standards, and what operators should focus on to make a success of NFV and SDN. You have made a number of good points, although I think some issues are missing and some points are made a little aggressively. The problems you identify are fair game, but we do need to think hard on what can make a difference in the resolving them.

So, on the issues you identify, I agree that:

- virtualization is not yet delivering on it's promise

- open source development has not been successfully married to the best practices of standards

- interoperability should be a key consideration in virtualized products and services

- the introduction of virtualization is slower than some commentators predicted

- there has been too much hype and not enough reality

- standardised APIs are critical 

- virtualized solutions may be over-engineered

- operators are really looking for new services / revenues

- operators want an open market place for virtualized products

You were a little harsh on some actors in the industry. As I'm from the standards world, you may be surprised that I want to defend our colleagues in the OS community. They are not as 'flaky' as you insinuate, we were really quite inspired about how quickly and how concrete they have been in developing solutions, ones that show how we could develop standards at the Broadband Forum in completely new ways. OS is distruptive because it is producing more than just powerpoint presentations.

Some points I expected you to make though, were absent. For the broadband community, we are keenly aware of issues like co-existence between traditional networks and programmable / virtualized functions, migration paths and best practice, the requirements of the smaller operators (who are critical to the market place) and potential regulatory questions.

I think you are right to emphasize the benefits of standards - industry consensus (market development), promoting conformance, 'safe harbor' and the discipline of the standards process. What is needed though, to gain the advantage of NFV and SDN, is to use the output of OS projects and the commercial software of the vendors in a standardised framework where you can prove new services, test them and develop best practice for deployment. We just announced a new initiative for Open Broadband on exactly this:https://www.broadband-forum.org/news/download/pressreleeases/2017/PR07_BBF_China_SDNFV_FINAL.pdf

Lastly, you are right to emphasize APIs, where some of your predictions / indications may already be happening.

Some providers who are already engaged at the BBF have contributed an industry level Telemetry API for application and cloud portals that basically form a migration path using legacy and cloud telemetry models.This came to the BBF so as to ensure the Residential Gateway specifications will follow through, and support an operator consensus on what the industry "managed resource model" will be.

I wish I could be at BCE to take up your offer to discuss this further, but unfortunately I am double booked.

danielcawrey 5/4/2017 | 11:49:36 AM
Re: Excellent Article Interesting read. As a technologist I do find virtualization interesting. However, I can see how constantly talking about it and its implementations can get old. The real business benefits of this are really what the conversation should be about these days. 
Mgagnon1956 5/3/2017 | 3:10:41 PM
Telecom App Store - Its all about the Business Applications Steve,

Great perspective on a vexxing challenge for Telco's. The idea of a Telco app store is timely.

What the Telco app store needs are business applications linked specific network virtualization enablers. Why one NFV service versus another? What underlying business benefit is dervied from linking Business App "A" to NFV Service "B" or "C". Does it matter and why? 

At Nubo Software our platform allows Enterprises to de-couple mobile apps, data and security from a physical mobile device and shift them to a virtualized mobile device running on a Telco Cloud. Virtualized apps such as Office 365, Outlook, SFDC & others are streamed back to physical devices over Telco connectivty fabrics that would benefit enourmously from NFV services to power a specific Qos user experience for the app. 

"Zero" data is transmitted to or resides on the device making the mobile session perfectly secure. NFV services allow high performance bandwidth & latency to be "dialed up" on demand allowing an amazing virtualized app experiences at Telco Cloud scale! 

We think mobile app virtualization (MAV) coupled with NFV services and MEC/5G, offer Telco's a tremendous opportunity to render business apps and NFV services from the same Telco app store. 

Your thoughts?



tpohara 5/3/2017 | 12:06:12 PM
Excellent Article I could not agree more with your article. We spent years re-engineering our core product(s) to address this very concept within the industry. 
tojofay 5/2/2017 | 6:54:26 PM
Re: A long reply some are leading the way: https://www.infinera.com/eurofiber-scales-service-offerings-with-end-to-end-infinera-network/
Steve Saunders 5/2/2017 | 4:40:15 PM
Re: A long reply "What I want to know how they are planning to raise prices with virtualization.  And if not raise prices, how they are expecting to raise profits. "


This is the exact problem Cisco is wrestling with with its software licensing right now, yes. 
brooks7 5/2/2017 | 10:39:21 AM
Re: A long reply By the way, by your definition I like the Telecom App store idea.  I want to throw out some thoughts about some boundaries around the services....

1 - Services have to save end customers money.  There are occasions where services can add to customer revenues, but that means a study of the niche and then being able to develop services aligned with that niche.  Not impossible, but I would think - second pass.

2 - Bandwidth Services and Transmission Services have to be ancillary to the problem solved.  The competition is IT services connected over by MPLS, the Internet, or a Hybrid of both.  Those services will be developed quickly and deployed ubitiquitously.  If you tie your special network to the service, you are likely to serve only a small minority. 

3 - Consider an Ecosystem play as the answer.  Instead of trying to compete with these IT services, consider instead a way of making them easier to develop and deploy or more secure or easier to access.  Revenue would come from increased network usage not higher value of a bit per second.

4 - Operational considerations at the customer should drive approaches.  IT folks are hard to hire and are expensive.  How can you reduce the need for end customers to hire more folks?  Be a partner and not a vendor.

5 - Speed is of the essence.  In today's world, switching costs are high and are avoided as a general rule.  That means that new applications are a land grab game right up front.  So unless you are considering a "Levi Strauss" model (see item 3), you need to be first or near first to market.  If you are not the value has been sucked out by the time you get there.


PS - Telecom equipment vendors...read #5...it is the way that Service Providers have been buying for over 10 years.  You either win up front or you don't win.  Quit throwing good money after failed product lines with the old Product Management/Marketing Hockey Sticks (We are at the inflection point right now!).

Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Sign In