![]() ![]() However, the transformation that service providers most need is ease of management and a better, success-based business model. Yes, there are new services to address SMB and specific verticals and for some providers, there is a net increase in revenues. ![]() chasing some whiz-bang features that would get used by a small fraction of your users! How many new services or innovative features are there for voice? I think the main end-user innovations that remain are embedding and extending communications into different environments (e.g., home phone extended to tablets and smartphones, business VoIP in Google Apps, CRM systems, etc.). Manage voice for the best cash across your entire subscriber base vs. The reality: The focus on voice should be on operational simplification and maximizing margins despite the headwinds and market dynamics. The big driver for NFV is the ability to scale services up and down quickly and introduce new network services more efficiently and in a timely manner, which makes IMS a natural early hit for NFV. This 2016 is a start to a multi-year process and is nowhere near an end date. The reality is that NFV architecture is in flux, interfaces undefined and vendor gear immature. Service provider respondents overwhelmingly stated the desire to run IMS networks in NFV environment in two years as opposed to purpose-built hardware and dedicated servers they have today. The Infonetics report also shows strong support and a desire to move quickly. The “we’ve always done it this way” approach need not be the path forward, especially given that the need for change is now. The reality: In most cases, you can’t! Service providers need to challenge the assumption that in order to deliver and monetize the voice services they need to rebuild the network with IMS (with NFV or hardware). How do you justify spending capital on a new network for a service (in this case, voice) that represents declining revenue? It’s the same one we’ve been raising given the cost and complexity of IMS and VoIP networks juxtaposed with the state of the voice services market. In a supporting piece of research, IMS in an NFV Environment: A Market Outlook, Infonetics asks an intriguing question. Returning to the focus of the webinar, Principal Analyst Diane Myers led the discussion and shared NFV adoption plans and vendors shared their views on challenges and key considerations. You could liken this to what Tom Nolle of CIMI Corporation has called this VNFaaS. Cloud service throws that model out the window. NFV and cloud technologies mean CAPEX, fixed and variable OPEX, and the same old operational model. Cloud is about service delivery and business model transformation. NFV is about technology and network evolution. The former requires building, the latter is about leveraging what’s already built.Ĭloud and NFV and are not synonymous. ![]() There is an important distinction to be made between cloud technologies and cloud X-as-a-service solutions. That’s two options: IMS in the cloud or IMS from the cloud. IMS NFV can be consumed in two ways: build the cloud or use the cloud. That’s three of my favorite topics right there: IMS, cloud, and NFV. Infonetics Research hosted a webinar earlier last week entitled Migrating to IMS in the Cloud with NFV.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |