[192838] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Accepting a Virtualized Functions (VNFs) into Corporate IT
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Alexander Harrowell)
Tue Nov 29 05:55:12 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <20161129083614.GQ28073@carcass.ledeuns.net>
From: Alexander Harrowell <a.harrowell@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 10:55:07 +0000
To: Denis Fondras <xxnog@ledeuns.net>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
This is a really interesting thread; my telco clients are mad keen on
various solutions of this general form. As a rule they would love to
consolidate their various SME and enterprise CPEs down to a single x86 box
that gets configured with VNFs from a central VIM or container pool. But
they'd also love to sell you all your networking out of that box - and one
of the big questions I have is just how many companies would accept "LAN as
a Service". It may be even more difficult for SMEs as the cost of going
back on the deal is higher the less in-house capability you have.
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Denis Fondras <xxnog@ledeuns.net> wrote:
> > On 28/Nov/16 19:53, Kasper Adel wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Vendor X wants you to run their VNF (Router, Firewall or Whatever) and
> they
> > refuse to give you root access, or any means necessary to do
> 'maintenance'
> > kind of work, whether its applying security updates, or any other similar
> > type of task that is needed for you to integrate the Linux VM into your
> IT
> > eco-system.
> >
> > Would this be an acceptable offering in today's IT from different type of
> > Enterprises (Minux the Googles, Facebooks...etc) ?
> >
>
> As long as the vendor will be held liable for ANY (and I mean it) problem
> that
> could happen on my infrastructure.
>
