“Network Function Virtualisation (NFV) aims to transform the way that network operators architect networks by evolving standard IT virtualisation technology to consolidate many network equipment types onto industry standard high volume servers, switches and storage”
ETSI document, “Network Function Virtualisation (NFV); Use Cases”
The above document from ETSI describes nine use cases of interest for NFV. Further to yesterday’s blog entry about SDN (Software Defined Networking), NFV is designed (amongst other things) to provide operators with rapid service innovation through greater control of network functions than is supported by traditional switched networks.
The use cases presented in ETSI’s document are as follows:
Network functions that could be managed by the virtual control plane can include firewall/security, prioritisation, WAN optimisation, intrusion prevention, responsive traffic engineering, etc. Does it also follow that OSS is just an extended network function and significantly blurs the lines between OSS and the network control?
But the next question is more fundamental to why OSS architectures of the past are likely to undergo revolutionary change in the near future – ETSI presents but nine use cases out of an almost unlimited set of possibilities, so how can structured data models (as per most current OSS) support NFV?
In the past, before virtualisation proliferated, a CSP’s service offerings were underpinned by a network platform that adhered to a structured data model. A device had cards, which had ports, which could connect together to form nailed-up circuits.
With nailed-up circuits, the data model of the service layer that sat on top of the network platform was also fairly well structured. This was perfect for a relational database structure.
Since the advent of packet-switched networks, the service layer has become far more flexible, introducing complexity which has proved to be a major challenge for B/OSS.
But now that the data model of the previously rock-solid network layer is becoming increasingly customisable, B/OSS have an increased degree of complexity to deal with because the network and services layers are moving targets.
Seems to me that end-to-end ruthless simplification and unstructured data models are the only ways to deal with this increased variability.
Standing out in a highly saturated and fragmented OSS market can be really difficult. We’re regularly involved in bake-offs where we see dozens of OSS
One of the things I love about my job is all the vendor demos I get to see. Product demos are one of the four
Have you read the book, “The 4-hour work week” by Tim Ferris? It was one of those relatively rare books that inspired a complete mindset
Over the years, we’ve been involved in many OSS procurement events and have seen a variety of different pricing models proposed by vendors. Being software,
Here at Passionate About OSS, we are exactly that – Passionate About OSS (Operational Support Systems). We’re also passionate about BSS, NMS, or any other names you call the tools that help to operationalise your network.
