That's what I'm asking about. While the thread Mark referenced, deals (in my humble opinion) primarily with automation side of things, my question is how the whole SDN thing became vendor-specific-closed-protocol?
I'm not talking specifically about any particular facet of SDN, such as automation or forwarding plane control over the network (though l personally most interested in the latter, at least for now) or anything else - rather, how 100% of solutions I've been presented over past year or so, are all closed code-proprietary protocol solutions? Not a single one was based on an open standard, such as Open Flow, not a single one is able to interoperate with others, though one particular SDN solution will cost *a third *same vendor "traditional" standard compliant equipment. That's for me, was begging the question - am I missing something here and I'm really be better off by selling my soul to a single vendor for eternity, rather than opting for standard compliant box? If there's such one to begin with? Best regards. בתאריך יום א׳, 15 במרץ 2020, 19:26, מאת Hunter Fuller <hf0...@uah.edu>: > Well, the "software-defined thing" which started it all, would be > "software-defined networking." And this was widely implemented in > OpenFlow. > > One could use OpenFlow to implement SDWAN or SDAccess, and in fact, we > did the latter, for a while (just in the lab/internal, not suitable > for release). But the vendors decided to implement their stuff on top > of something else instead. The temptation to make money was too great > for them to use the existing standard, even though it was already > implemented in their own products. > > -- > Hunter Fuller > Router Jockey > VBH Annex B-5 > +1 256 824 5331 > > Office of Information Technology > The University of Alabama in Huntsville > Network Engineering > > On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 8:07 AM Alex K. <nsp.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > I was thinking, throughout last design sessions with my customers, those > > vendors are really pushing hard for their "SDN something" solutions > > adoption. > > > > SD WAN, SD access, Software defined everything, are all closed standards, > > aren't they? I was wondering why will we abandon the model for open > > standards, which had served as so well for many-many years? There's no > real > > world product, be it network-device-white-box or SDx controller, > > implementing an open standard, isn't it? > > > > Sure, 99.99999% of those offerings, are really suitable for enterprises > > only and maybe (just maybe) a data center. And while network-as-a-service > > is really a thing for service providers only, I was thinking, is it > really > > a good thing, to base your network, be it enterprise or other, on closed > > standard? > > > > So what do you think? I'm genuinely interested in our community thoughts > on > > that. Is there is, an open software defined network standard or is it > > really a good thing, to sell your soul to a single vendor, for years to > > come? > > > > Best regards. > > _______________________________________________ > > cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
