That's just it. SBCs are a terrible example of "NFV" because SBCs do not
actually perform a "network function" of the sort that begs to be
decoupled and abstracted in the way that NFV and SDN envisions, like
software-defined switches and routers. The idea that the SBC is a kind
of "voice firewall" is a fiction pushed by the marketing departments of
SBC vendors.
What is an SBC? It's a SIP B2BUA with some sort of provisioning and
management interface. If you're lucky, there are some ASICs or
kernel-mode crypto, transcoding and/or packet forwarding functions. It's
an application-layer construct, a giant softphone touted as a condom
that must go over innocent and vulnerable "softswitches". It's not a
"network" element, but it looks much better on Visio diagrams to depict
it as one.
On 04/06/2016 09:58 PM, Ryan Delgrosso wrote:
They have more than a buzzword for this, its a whole movement.
Realistically NFV encompasses more than just raw virtualization its also
elastic capacity and the orchestration layer to manage it. The only
problem is most vendors have only accomplished the virtualization part
and are still sorting out the orchestration while trumpeting NFV.
On 4/6/2016 6:45 PM, Alex Balashov wrote:
So, it's news to the Bellhead world that most "SBCs" run on commodity
pizza boxes & OSs that are branded by the vendor and resold at large
markups, and that the software can be separated from the hardware and
executed on other pizza boxes, and, indeed, inside VMs? And they have
a whole buzzword for this?
_______________________________________________
VoiceOps mailing list
[email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
--
Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC
1447 Peachtree Street NE, Suite 700
Atlanta, GA 30309
United States
Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direct)
Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/
_______________________________________________
VoiceOps mailing list
[email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
