NFV Solution Evaluation Methodology

Mark Tinka mark.tinka at seacom.mu
Thu Aug 4 06:20:58 UTC 2016


On 3/Aug/16 18:11, jim deleskie wrote:

> I struggled with this whole SDN/NVF/insert marketing term for a while at
> first, until I sat down and actually though about.  When I strip away all
> the foo, what I'm left with is breaking things down to pieces and and
> putting logo blocks together in a way that best suits what I'm doing.  It
> is really going back to the way things were a long time ago in the days of
> 12/2400 baud models and 56k frame relay.  It doesn't help vendors vendors
> that want to sell you over priced foo for features you don't really need.
> It lets you, if you have clue build your own right bits. It will see some
> vendors evolve, new vendors of their brand of foo appear and some vendors
> die, but end of day, its no different then most of were doing back in the
> "good ol days"

The way I see it, the whole SDN/NFV talk has finally devolved into
automation (separating the control and data plane is sooooo 2013).

Automation is not new - a lot of networks have been automating for a
long time now, albeit in custom ways that only worked for them... ummh,
rephrase: was not tested in other networks.

The reason I see SDN/NFV becoming a thing is just to have a standard way
of automating. That's it.

Mark.



More information about the NANOG mailing list