NFV growing pains
Several operators are jumping on board the network functions virtualization (NFV) bandwagon. It promises to provide service providers with the speed and agility necessary to pump out automated network functions at an unprecedented clip. No technological transition is without its growing pains, however. Let’s consider some of the issues facing NFV deployment and possible ways to address these hurdles.
New technologies
Experience with the cloud can help operators with NFV deployments, but they may still find it difficult staying up-to-date with the latest technologies leading the switch. In addition, NFV operations stand in stark contrast to conventional operations. Operators will have to adjust to innovative systems for the management and orchestration (MANO) of virtual services and functions, which do not provider all the features necessary to ensure a smooth migration. To make the shift a success, service providers will need to consider automation, orchestration, policies and management.
Legacy infrastructure
NFV has been heralded as a way to reduce capital expenses (CAPEX) and operating expenses (OPEX) by enabling administrators to spend less time managing data centers. Nevertheless, a significant challenge to adoption and scale is legacy networks. Several older products will not be upgraded to support the technology. Regardless, operators can still deploy NFV in several developing applications. Moreover, virtual network functions (VNF) can run virtually on legacy infrastructure. Operators can take the profit acquired from VNFs and invest it in more elaborate NFV related projects.
Security issues
Although NFV provides a variety of new network functions, it also opens up a window for new security risks. Software is by its very nature less secure than hardware. Routers and firewalls on dedicated hardware are harder to crack from a security stance. Software is much more vulnerable to the Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) attacks. The platform must be shielded from constant threats that can flood the network. A hypervisor can provide a high level of isolation for virtual machines (VMs), meaning if one VM is infected by a computer virus it may not spread to other VMs.
Lack of standards
Another challenge facing the virtualized market is the need for standards for communications among NFV components. Developing standards for these types of systems usually takes many years, but the telecom industry is ready to start deployments now. The European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) is the main force setting standards for the market. Although competing standards have been proposed, the industry lacks an overall consensus on the matter. Operators can participate in developing these standards through the The ETSI Industry Specification Group, which is available to members and nonmembers.
Not enough strong business cases
Another barrier to virtualization is a lack of carefully defined business cases. There are a host of reasons why this is so. Vendors have a proclivity to hyperbolize what NFV can do, which leads to disappointment among operators whenever a certain feature proves short. On the other hand, some vendors aren’t thinking big enough with respect to NFV. Although vendors are quick to boast the benefits of NFV, they are less inclined to set the scope of their solutions, failing to present a compelling business case in return. Moreover, several advantages of the technology, like quicker time-to-market, optimizing networks and innovative services, are hard to measure, making business cases based on those concepts even harder to define.
Fortunately, none of the highlighted hurdles are insurmountable. As noted earlier, every technological metamorphosis has its stumbling blocks. These wrinkles will likely smooth out as large-scale NFV deployments are launched.
Table of Contents
