The Great Flexibility of Disaggregated Architecture
Once moving to the business and operational model, however, a more detailed analysis is required. The fact that the Network Cloud solution is based on a disaggregated architecture requires a different take on the engagement model. The great flexibility of the model drives a change in the engagement process, calling for separate engagement with hardware, software and, in some cases, integration vendors.
This would seem like a big headache for the procurement and operations departments but, in looking deeper, it actually brings benefits and simplification for both departments.
Moving to a shared infrastructure means the same hardware and underlying native software can serve multiple network functions (exactly like cloud infrastructure serves multiple IT functions). This means that those “multiple engagements” with hardware and software vendors should not be compared to a single engagement with a monolithic vendor, but to the many engagements with separate vendors for multiple network functions, as illustrated in the following tables:
Monolithic Approach
Network Function | Function-1 | Function-2 | Function-3 | Function-4 | Function-5 |
HW vendor | Vendor-1 | Vendor-2 | Vendor-3 | Vendor-4 | Vendor-5 |
SW vendor | Vendor-1 | Vendor-2 | Vendor-3 | Vendor-4 | Vendor-5 |
Integrator | Vendor-1 | Vendor-2 | Vendor-3 | Vendor-4 | Vendor-5 |
Network Cloud Approach
Network Function | Function-1 | Function-2 | Function-3 | Function-4 | Function-5 |
HW vendor | Vendor-1 | Vendor-1 | Vendor-1 | Vendor-1 | Vendor-1 |
SW vendor | Vendor-2 | Vendor-2 | Vendor-2 | Vendor-3 | Vendor-3 |
Integrator | Vendor-4 | Vendor-4 | Vendor-4 | Vendor-4 | Vendor-4 |