So does Gedeon from TELUS expects NFV to be FREE????>>Gedeon has several gripes about NFV in its current shape. The most obvious is that Telus >>Corp. (NYSE: TU; Toronto: T) has not been able to realize cost saving targets >>because of the software fees that vendors charge.
You get what you pay for. Even WATER is NOT FREE. Vendors need to make some money, be it NFV or proprietory hardware. NFV Vendors are NOT here for doing CHARITY. If Gedeon expected moving to NFV was FREE, then he is biggest fool of all time. Did he expect vendors to sell Telus NFV for pennies? NFV is not meant to be free, yeah it is cheaper than proprietory hardware, but NOT free. DO NOT EXPECT 99% DISCOUNT, OK?
Either STAY PUT where you are using the existing hardware or buy NFV and PAY for services lol.
"I pay people like Red Hat all of a sudden for OpenStack," grumbles Gedeon, referring to the >>open source infrastructure platform and one of its chief supporters.
You don't need to go to Red Hat, you can have vanilla Openstack for FREE, but NO support, no hardening etc. Red Hat is here to do business just like any other company. not to do charity. Does TELUS has a mobile plan for FREE???
Re: "I pay people like Red Hat all of a sudden for OpenStack,"Operations and TCO are very important in vendor selection, contract terms, and so on. No doubt operators are often more than a little over-optimistic at the start of, say, a 5-year contract. But it is very much is part of the equation.
The elephant in the room for NFV is public cloud. We kind of have a line-of-sight to a point where many/some network functions will migrate to public cloud infrastcrture. From there you move pretty quickly (logically speaking) to operators paying for network-as-a-service. Maybe a bit speculative and long-range, but to be dismissed at your peril.
Re: "I pay people like Red Hat all of a sudden for OpenStack,"Cheaper to buy is often more expensive to operate, but how many operators actually bother to calculate or project cost of ownership of network purchases over the planned deployment life? I wouldn't be suprised if the CapEx savings on the initial purchase are just a rounding error compared to TCO, yet it is often the decisive factor. But what would the TCO savings be of network equipment that is for instance 20% cheaper but also yields 10% lower network utilization due to reduced port buffering capabilities? The challenge of selling and buying network equipment is how to make these cost/performance differences more transparent.
Re: "I pay people like Red Hat all of a sudden for OpenStack,"You could argue that in some areas operators have already done well out of NFV by driving down hardware costs on appliances. It's not the operational transformation many want, but is a lot cheaper to buy, say, a classic EPC then it was before NFV. There are many reasons for price movements, but pressure and desire for software-only has certainly played a part.
Time is probably the key metric for NFV/Cloud. Refreshes and new deployments are opportunities and it looks like that is how NFV is making progress... And it is evolving all the time (cloud native, etc.)
The good thing is there is, for the most part, a competitive market. Operators can buy from vendors (including support), they can develop their own, or a mixture of these.
Re: "I pay people like Red Hat all of a sudden for OpenStack,"Vendors and industry experts oversold the economic benefits of NFV, no doubt. The focus on cost saving obscured the main strengths of virtualization, which involve significant improvements in agility, service support, time to market, etc. In other words, business expansion rather than cost reduction. The idea of disintermediating technology suppliers hasn't made any sense for the reasons you note. The decision-makers at the telcos can blame outside forces all they want, but ultimately they are responsible for their company's NFV strategy.
Re: "I pay people like Red Hat all of a sudden for OpenStack,"Perhaps some of the NFV "business case" assumptions were wrong to begin with because network equipment vendors are typically subsidizing the OS software cost through the hardware sales. When hardware and software are sold as unbundled products this is no longer possible, and the cost balance changes completely. Even then it's tough for equipment vendors to support a "white box" or NFV business model because often there aren't any R&D savings that can be passed on since most added value (and revenues) still comes from selling integrated systems. But equipment vendors do apply NFV where there are good application fits for an x86 architecture from a cost/performance point of view.
Recently vendors are starting to offer infrastructure APIs that allow operators to run their own Network OS and directly access the RIB, FIB and MPLS tables, so that might be the way to go. It still remains to be seen how widely applicable, reliable and cost effective that will be in practice for tmost operators. Commercial routing stacks have gone through years of product hardening in thousands of field deployments and countless multi-vendor interworking scenarios. With every new feature you must run a battery of regression tests in a very sizeable testbed to make sure nothing got broken in the upgrade. These are all costs and capabilities that are hard to replicate and easily overlooked.
Ultimately there aren't many shortcuts if you value quality and reliability. And should things break down it's nice having a vendor you can hold responsible instead of your IT department.
Re: "I pay people like Red Hat all of a sudden for OpenStack,"So some telcos have the same mindset as their customers who want all kinds of services for little or no actual money. Kind of ironic.
You get what you pay for. Even WATER is NOT FREE. Vendors need to make some money, be it NFV or proprietory hardware. NFV Vendors are NOT here for doing CHARITY. If Gedeon expected moving to NFV was FREE, then he is biggest fool of all time. Did he expect vendors to sell Telus NFV for pennies? NFV is not meant to be free, yeah it is cheaper than proprietory hardware, but NOT free. DO NOT EXPECT 99% DISCOUNT, OK?
Either STAY PUT where you are using the existing hardware or buy NFV and PAY for services lol.
"I pay people like Red Hat all of a sudden for OpenStack," grumbles Gedeon, referring to the >>open source infrastructure platform and one of its chief supporters.
You don't need to go to Red Hat, you can have vanilla Openstack for FREE, but NO support, no hardening etc. Red Hat is here to do business just like any other company. not to do charity. Does TELUS has a mobile plan for FREE???