Home | Reports | Technical Documents | Tech-Blog | One-Shot Gallery | Korea ICT News | Korea Communication Market Data | List of Contributors | Become a Contributor |    
 
 
Section 5G 4G LTE C-RAN/Fronthaul Gigabit Internet IPTV/Video Streaming IoT SDN/NFV Wi-Fi KT SK Telecom LG U+ Network Protocol Samsung   Korean Vendors
 
CHANNELS     HFR    |  Mobile Fronthaul Solution  |  Carrier Ethernet Solution  | Resources        
CHANNELS     ZARAM    |  XGSPON 10G SFP+ ONT  |  Use cases  | Evolution of FTTH Access Network    

 

Why Use HARDWARE Appliances for SOFTWARE-Defined WAN?
May 25, 2017 | By Prayson Pate @ ADVA (PPate@advaoptical.com)
Online viewer:
Comments (2)
15

We are pleased to share with you all an interesting article contributed by Prayson Pate.

 
 

Prayson Pate

Chief Technology Officer for Ensemble at ADVA Optical Networking

 

All Articles by Prayson Pate

 
     
  How to contribute your article to Netmanias.com !  
     
  List of Contributors  

 

 

     
 

Enterprises are investigating software-defined WAN (SD-WAN) to save networking costs and gain application control. Hoping to increase customer retention, service providers are rolling out managed SD-WAN offerings. These initial service offerings rely on deploying closed and vendor-specific SD-WAN appliances at the customer site. 

 

With so much buzz in the SD-WAN community, it is easy to forget that the "S" in SD-WAN stands for software. Given the availability of software virtual network functions (VNFs) for SD-WAN, why would we use closed hardware-centric appliances to deliver an innovative service?

 

SD-WAN Should Fit Into a Cloud-Centric Architecture

 

Operators know that deploying appliances to deliver SD-WAN is problematic. One issue is that using appliances ties a service to the infrastructure. Doing so is contrary to the service provider's vision of being able to treat services like applications. In that cloud-centric model, services are defined, built, delivered and managed at the speed of software. This eliminates the need to change underlying hardware and frees us from worrying about its details. Using a VNF version of SD-WAN is much more consistent with that cloud vision.

 

Treat SD-WAN Like a Set of Network Functions, Not a Standalone Application

 

SD-WAN has a number of features that are useful for building private overlay networks. Deploying these in an appliance has two big drawbacks:

 

  1. Monolithic: The full set of SD-WAN functions are always included, even if unused in a given deployment. For example, a fiber-fed location with no backup may need the policy control and overlay tunneling capabilities of SD-WAN, but not the WAN optimization or hybrid WAN features. The inclusion of unneeded features may add cost or complexity to the deployment.
  2. Standalone: SD-WAN appliances tightly couple their functions to the VPN service, and are not available as components in a larger service offering.


Integrate SD-WAN with Universal Platforms

 

Service providers are replacing closed appliances with universal CPE (uCPE) platforms that are hosted on commercial off-the-shelf servers. These uCPE platforms enable the dynamic deployment of a wide variety of software VNFs, ultimately empowering service innovation and service on demand. Deploying a closed and vendor-specific appliance does not fit this universal model.

 

Use SOFTWARE for SD-WAN

 

Eager to gain the benefits of innovation while reducing cost and power, operators are embracing cloud-centric technologies such as NFV, SDN, and SD-WAN. SD-WAN can fit into this vision, but only if it is deployed as SOFTWARE on an open platform. Anything else is a step backward to the bad old days of vendor lock-in.

 

For more articles by Prayson Pate on Technically Speaking, please see: http://blog.advaoptical.com/en/About/prayson-pate.aspx

 
     
Netteligent 2017-05-31 21:22:14

We recently evaluate many SD-WAN platform and solutions with so much hypes. "Open platform" is our biggest issue. Most of the SD-WAN vendors do not work with each others with overlapping functionalities. Interoperability and Scalabity are our biggest issues.  There is little benefits and not much in cost saving.  

Carrier Ethernet and xWDM optical transport are our best solutions for the next 5 years. We expect to see more progress and drive cost down further.

Craig (Go-Ahead Group) via LinkedIn 2017-06-15 10:34:00

A great read and interesting viewpoint. I agree that right now SD-Wan seems a bit of a halfway house, but that is okay given it's at the early adoption stage. It will evolve and for me will becomes a misnomer in that it's really about NFV.

Thank you for visiting Netmanias! Please leave your comment if you have a question or suggestion.
View All (819)
4.5G (1) 5G (88) AI (6) AR (1) ARP (3) AT&T (1) Akamai (1) Authentication (5) Big Data (2) Blockchain (3) C-RAN/Fronthaul (17) CDN (4) CPRI (4) Carrier Ethernet (3) China (1) China Mobile (2) Cisco (1) Cloud (5) CoMP (6) Connected Car (4) DHCP (5) Edge Computing (1) Ericsson (2) FTTH (6) GSLB (1) GiGAtopia (2) Gigabit Internet (19) Google (7) Google Global Cache (3) HLS (5) HSDPA (2) HTTP Adaptive Streaming (5) Handover (1) Huawei (1) IEEE 802.1 (1) IP Routing (7) IPTV (21) IoST (3) IoT (55) KT (42) Korea (19) Korea ICT Market (1) Korea ICT Service (13) Korea ICT Vendor (1) LG U+ (18) LSC (1) LTE (78) LTE-A (16) LTE-B (1) LTE-H (2) LTE-M (3) LTE-U (4) LoRa (7) MEC (3) MPLS (2) MPTCP (3) MWC 2015 (8) NB-IoT (6) Netflix (2) Network Protocol (21) Network Slicing (4) New Radio (9) Nokia (1) OSPF (2) OTT (3) PCRF (1) Platform (2) QoS (3) RCS (4) Roaming (1) SD-WAN (17) SDN/NFV (71) SIM (1) SK Broadband (2) SK Telecom (34) Samsung (5) Security (16) Self-Driving (1) Small Cell (2) Spectrum Sharing (2) Switching (6) TAU (2) UHD (5) VR (2) Video Streaming (12) VoLTE (8) VoWiFi (2) Wi-Fi (31) YouTube (6) blockchain (1) eICIC (1) eMBMS (1) iBeacon (1) security (1) telecoin (1) uCPE (2)
Password confirmation
Please enter your registered comment password.
Password