Back in early 2014, PAOSS posted an article about the importance of closed loop designs in OSS, which included the picture below:
It generated quite a bit of discussion at the time and led me to being introduced to two companies that were separately doing some interesting aspects of this theoretical closed loop system. [Interestingly, whilst being global companies, they both had strong roots tying back to my home town of Melbourne, Australia.]
More recently, Brian Levy of TM Forum has published a more sophisticated closed-loop system, in the form of a Knowledge Defined Network (KDN), as seen in the diagram below:
I like that this control-loop utilises relatively nascent technologies like intent networking and the constantly improving machine-learning capabilities (as well as analytics for delta detection) to form a future OSS / KDN model.
The one thing I’d add is the concept of inputs (in the form of use cases such as service orders or new product types) as well as outputs / outcomes such as service activations for customers and not just the steady-state operations of a self-regulating network. Brian Levy’s loop is arguably more dependent on the availability and accuracy of data, so it needs to be initially seeded with inputs (and processing of workflows).
Current-day OSS are too complex and variable (ie un-repeatable), so perhaps this represents an architectural path towards a simpler future OSS – in terms of human interaction at least – although the technology required to underpin it will be very sophisticated. The sophistication will be palatable if we can deliver the all-important repeatability described in, “I want a business outcome, not a deployment challenge.” BTW. This refers to repeatability / reusability across organisations, not just being able to repeatedly run workflows within organisations.Read the Passionate About OSS Blog for more or Subscribe to the Passionate About OSS Blog by Email