Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
Comment: Further refinement of opening paragraphs

...

  • Higher development costs due to the need to develop virtualised services on multiple custom platforms for each operator
  • Increased complexities due to the need to maintain multiple versions of applications to support each custom environment
  • Lack of testing and validation commonalities, leading to inefficiencies and increased time to market. While the operators will still do internal testing, but using an industry driven verification program based on a common cloud infrastructure would provide a head start.
  • Slower adoption of cloud-native applications and architectures. A Common common Telco Cloud may provide an easier path to methodologies that will drive faster cloud-native development.
  • Increased operational overhead due to the need for operators to integrate diverse and sometime conflicting cloud platform requirements.

The need for a Common Telco Cloud Infrastructure model across the industry to facilitate more rapid adoption is clear. By running network applications services as software rather on commodity hardware, rather than on purpose-built hardware, the operators aspire to realize realise operational efficiencies , and capital expense savings. These virtualised network services  services are increasingly being used by telecom operators to support their internal and customer facing network infrastructures. The need for a Common Cloud Infrastructure model across the industry to facilitate more rapid adoption of cloud is clear.

Scope



scope



The diagram above shows the different types of specifications and how they relate to the different elements of a typical cloud platform stack. RA1 builds upon the Reference Model (RM) specifications, and details:

...