<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 1/Aug/20 18:23, Robert Raszuk wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAOj+MMGDtrHEc5XqUU6FuyHi+rULvNmC9XzsmZk+gjMdSM8sUQ@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>Virtualization is not becoming obsolete ... quite reverse
in fact in all types of deployments I can see around. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The point is that VM provides hardware virtualization
while kubernetes with containers virtualize OS apps and
services are running on in isolation. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Clearly to virtualize operating systems as long as your
level of virtualization mainly in terms of security
and resource consumption isolation & reservation is
satisfactory is a much better and lighter option. <br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I see cloud-native as NFV++. It requires some adjustment to how
classic NFV has been deployed, and that comes down to whether
operators (especially those who err on the side of network
operations rather than services) see value in upgrading their stack
to cloud-native.<br>
<br>
If you're a Netflix or an Uber, sure, a cloud-native architecture is
probably the only way you can scale. But if you are simple network
operators who focus more on pushing packets than over-the-top
services, particularly if you already have some NFV, making the move
to cloud-native/NFV++ is a whole consideration.<br>
<br>
Mark.<br>
</body>
</html>