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 VoiceOps at voiceops.org 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/