With Opendaylight, do we still need Onos?

Editor's note:ONOS The advent of opendaylight is really a challenge, in fact, this is not a single choice for us, the two have their own strengths, what kind of demand on the choice of the road is not it?

This is another new choice question.

650) this.width=650; "src=" http://s3.51cto.com/wyfs02/M02/6B/72/wKioL1UuF_zzdL8rAAJvoXx7Vq0381.jpg "title=" 1.jpg " alt= "Wkiol1uuf_zzdl8raajvoxx7vq0381.jpg"/>

of course, such a choice is full of the entire telecommunications industry from the glorious to the decline of the whole process, that is the standard dispute: With the standard has everything, lost the standard to lose the entire industry.

in the traditional it Industry, only the fact of the standard, Who is big market share of high who is the right, the user's real demand is pushing the it > The fast forward of the industry, the telecommunications sector will always slowly, come up a few children first around the standard noisy, after compromise and blending, come out a standard. But when this standard comes out, perhaps the industrial environment has undergone a great change, the standard will not be useful.

in the telecommunications industry, from a motion to the standard, and then to the product business, how to take a 5 - year time, but in the user and business rapid iteration today,5 years time, the yellow vegetable is cool. This is not, we ushered in a choice question, that is in SDN/NFV of open-source controller level, the telecommunications industry will choose? is to choose it/the Internet world has been verified opendaylight, or another stove to engage in ONOS.

SDN/NFV is no longer a story

Perhaps in many people's view, SDN/NFV such fashionable words, Mainly the internet and the it enterprise in play, Telecoms is a bit old in here. But this is not the case, SDN/NFV has been widely used in the telecommunications industry.

sdn NFV sdn The concept of introduction to the telecommunications industry, the main purpose is to hope that the network can be open, intelligent and software.

from the current application situation, whether in the fixed network / mobile network access, metropolitan area Network, small base station gateway, data center, core network, and even the backbone network has begun to introduce the concept of SDN/NFV, have also made some good practice. For example, the C-ran launched by China Mobile in previous years is intended to replace dedicated hardwarewith a low-cost IA architecture in the Mobile Access network .

    PFA sdn Controller to flexibly define the network model, forwarding policies, directives, and traffic metadata, and really use the control platform and data plane separation technology for wan Span style= "font-family: ' The song Body '; > field, and through the development of efficient business chain scheduling mechanism, the implementation of the ip network user session flexible control. The research and development program will be located in the ip The application and functionality of the network edge, such as the function virtualization bras , dpi firewall, etc.

    I have also been fortunate to see the technical demonstration of the Institute, in the Middle control layer, China Telecom adopted aOpendaylight+openstackthe way thatOpenStackThe main is to achieve cloud resource control,Opendaylightthe main implementation of network control. ForOpenStack, we are sure to be familiar with all the mainstream manufacturers have expressed theirOpenStackof support and love;Opendaylight, the industry does not know much, it is byLinuxthe foundation was created toSDNas wellNFVThe stack builds execution standards.

With opendaylight, do we still need ONOS ?

Speaking of which, the other protagonist of the story should appear, that is ONOS. According to ONOS , it is the industry's first open-source SDN controller platform for carrier business scenarios , created and led by the industry's top operators and the most comprehensive and powerful equipment providers.

ONOS focuses on operator networks and business scenarios, taking into account operators ' high performance, high reliability, security and high scalability requirements, with a good initial architecture design, thus more in line with the operator's future-oriented business and network development strategy requirements, Provides end-to-end support for operators ' on-demand, real-time, automated deployment, resource allocation, and tuning requirements from the WAN to the data center.

> That's true, but what can really be achieved, onos There's not much place to prove myself. This differs from the opendaylight

Relevant people in China Telecom Institute said that from the current technical cooperation and development, from the perspective of open source, based on opendaylight and open stack technology, you can achieve the desired results. Of course, he also explicitly told me that onos and opendaylight sure there are pros and cons. , can not directly comment on the merits, and can not replace China Telecom Group to do technology selection.

Have met our current design requirements, I can only say so. Next, it depends on the current network with the boss After getting through the operation effect, can finally decide which technology to use to do the controller. "

in the author's opinion, the technical route choice behind, is not merely the technical factor, but comes from the different industry camp's game. Our telecoms industry has been developing for so many years and is now in the bottleneck. Of course, the bottleneck is not only technical and commercial operations, but ideas and institutions, especially for many years regarded as criterion of the carrier-grade thinking. As Yu, a technology expert at China Mobile, says, we really need to introduce some IT thinking to transform the cured telecoms industry. With opendaylight, we really do need ONOS.

Reprinted from:C114 China Communication Network

With Opendaylight, do we still need Onos?