世界各国のリアルタイムなデータ・インテリジェンスで皆様をお手伝い

会員登録

マイページ

ネットワークの仮想化:長い道のり

Network Virtualization: The Road Gets Longer

 

出版社 出版年月電子媒体価格ページ数
Heavy Reading
ヘビーリーディング社
2017年1月US$3,495
エンタープライズライセンス
15

サマリー

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYPDF

The Future of Virtualization Indexes – part of Light Reading's Virtuapedia initiative – track communications service provider (CSP) progress in deploying virtualization. The indexes are based on direct input from more than three dozen CSPs worldwide, and are intended to provide CSPs with a set of clear benchmarks that can be used to measure their virtualization progress against that reported by a select group of the world's leading network operators.

The indexes are organized in three functional groupings: Planning, Deployment, and Spending. Each index grouping provides CSPs with a single, integrated view of where the world's leading CSPs are in the virtualization process, and the progress they are making – or not making – in moving to the virtualization model. The indexes will be updated twice a year, providing an industry-wide composite scorecard for tracking the transition to virtualized networks and services.

Network Virtualization: The Road Gets Longer provides the findings of Heavy Reading's third survey on the Future of Virtualization Indexes, based on data gathered in November 2016.

Participation in this survey was by invitation only, with participants targeted for their knowledge and influence regarding their company's virtualization programs. Forty different CSPs are represented in this report, including Tier 1 providers from all major regions (Asia/Pacific, CALA, EMEA and North America). Participating CSPs include a mix of wireline, mobile and cable providers, with the majority operating converged networks (wireline and wireless) with national footprints. The majority of CSPs were Tier 1 operators, with the remainder being Tier 2 and Tier 3.

The key findings of this report are as follows:

Planning Index

  • The percentage of CSPs that have identified all of the functions they plan to virtualize by 2020 grew from 4% in May 2016 to 11% in November 2016.
  • Timetables for identifying all of the functions to be virtualized by 2020 continue to slip. A year ago, 38% expected to have this done in 2016, but only 11% actually did.
  • Network functions remain the top virtualization priority. "NFV/cloud services" replaces CPE as the second-highest priority, although CPE was still #3. None of the other areas registered double digits.
  • Just over two thirds of CSPs have identified all or most of their high-priority functions, and 18% have a complete timetable in place for testing and deploying them.
  • Confidence in timetables for testing and deploying high-priority functions has declined dramatically over the past year. The percentage saying they are "extremely confident" has declined from 22% in November 2015 to only 5% in November 2016.

Deployment Index

  • Development work on high-priority virtualization areas continues, but progress is slow. More than 50% have started on 10-50% of these areas, but only 17% have started on more than 50% of them.
  • Similarly, there has been slow progress on moving high-priority functions into production. The percentage of CSPs with at least some of these functions in production reversed the slide seen in May, growing from 71% to 77%. However, the percentage with more than 25% of these functions in production declined from 17% to 13%.
  • As would be expected by the delays in development of the high-priority functions, the timetables for deploying them continue to slide. The bulk of deployments originally expected to take place in 2016 have shifted to 2017, while more than a third of CSPs in November 2016 said they will need until 2019 or later.
  • The portion of CSPs that expect to complete their entire virtualization transformation by the end of 2020 remained the same in November 2016 compared to May. However, the percentage stating they would complete it by 2022 grew from 22% in May 2016 to 30% in November.

Spending Index

  • As in the May survey, the majority of CSPs in November 2016 said that virtualization would make up 10% or less of their capex budget in the following year. Still, more than 75% say their capex on virtualization will increase in 2017.
  • Most CSPs (57%) continue to believe that their capex will not level off or begin to decline until 2020 or later, although that is slightly fewer than in the first two studies.
  • As in the May survey, very few CSPs (11%) expect virtualization to result in lower operating expenses in the next two years. Most continue to expect to see some opex relief from virtualization in three to five years, although in this survey zero respondents said that virtualization would have no impact on opex.
  • The percentage of CSPs expecting virtualization will lower their opex by 10% by 2019 or sooner grew from 51% in May 2016 to 70% in November. None believe it will take more than 10 years to see these savings.

Network Virtualization: The Road Gets Longer is published in PDF format.



目次

目次ファイル(PDF)

 

ページTOPに戻る

同社・類似レポート一覧

  • 同社同テーマのレポートはありません。

プレスリリース

[プレスリリース原文]

Evolving the Mobile Security Architecture Toward 5G

Heavy Lifting Analyst Notes
Patrick Donegan, Founder and Principal Analyst, HardenStance
2/24/2017
 
 
 
 
 
The announcement at RSA 2017 of the Cyber Threat Alliance (CTA) -- a non-profit trade association formed by several leading security vendors for sharing cyber threat intelligence -- is timely. It reminds us how much threat intelligence matters. And it reminds us that for large organizations with complex security requirements, such as communications service providers (CSPs), the scope and scale of their security capabilities is increasingly important.

In the mobile network sector, smartphones haven't inflicted attack impacts on the scale inflicted by PCs, servers and workstations. But the momentum in mobile threats is building. Android's vulnerabilities are well known. And with commercial malware discovered in the App Store for the first time in 2015, and a zero-day exploit uncovered in iOS in 2016, even the iPhone's famed security barriers have been found wanting.

As discussed in a new white paper, "Evolving the Mobile Security Architecture Toward 5G," 5G will be the first generation of cellular to launch in an era when the Internet is routinely weaponized. In addition to extending the 2G, 3G and 4G security framework, 5G will generate new security requirements. Think of security within and between different network slices; the threat posed by end devices capable of supporting throughput of up to 100 Mbit/s; and the security controls needed around remote medical procedures.

Operators are heavily reliant on implementing security from within the network. And here, the generally slow pace of network transformation by CSPs compares poorly with the much faster pace of Webscale Internet companies (WICs).

While there are several exceptions among the industry's leaders, most operators haven't made enough progress on virtualizing their networks. As supported by new data in the latest edition of Heavy Reading's Future of Virtualization Indexes -- see "Network Virtualization: The Road Gets Longer" -- most virtual network functions (VNFs) have been implemented in isolation from one another, with very little in the way of infrastructure sharing, automation or orchestration.

From a security standpoint, this matters a lot. Yes, the WICs have a tendency to outpace the CSPs in technology innovation. But so does the attacker community. In addition to being needed for revenue generation and opex reduction in general, the automated network scalability and agility of SDN and NFV are also needed to respond to the threat environment. Network security applications delivered more dynamically and at scale needs to be a primary driver of a more software-programmable approach -- not just an afterthought.

The telecom industry is arriving at a consensus that 5G requires a fully featured NFV Infrastructure (NFVI). The piecemeal virtualization model therefore runs out of road at the 5G inflection point. Given this emerging consensus, operators need to start evolving their networks now in a compatible direction. In that sense, 5G is injecting welcome momentum into software programmability, which can be leveraged to drive a more robust, fit-for-purpose mobile network security architecture as well.

Even as recently as the launch of 4G in 2009, the threat actors lined up against network operators and their customers posed nothing like the risk they posed today. Equally, the type of security artillery needed to protect against those threats has changed in just the last three or four years.

The sharing of threat intelligence by major security vendors in the Cyber Threat Alliance, as previously mentioned, is just one example of how the threat defense landscape is changing. Others include:

  • More software-programmable access controls for allowing differentiated access privileges for employees and partners with respect to corporate applications;
  • Leveraging of anomaly detection, so that malware that has evaded detection by conventional perimeter controls can be identified by its behavior within the network, including by deviations from the norm of a file’s own unique, historical behavior in the network.
  • Intense monitoring, pooling and analysis of DNS-related activity, given how frequently and lethally it is used as an attack vector (including the attacks on Dyn and Deutsche Telekom at the end of last year, leveraging the Mirai botnet).
  • The type of high-end cybersecurity personnel that operators need to design, implement and operate network security are in very short supply.

Convention dictates that operators build out all of their own security infrastructure. Yet changes in the threat and defensive landscapes in upcoming 5G standards, and in cloud networking capabilities, suggest that operators should pause to consider whether self-build is necessarily the right model for the future.

Operators need to reflect on how their own achievements to date compare with state-of-the-art levels of automation and orchestration in the cloud. They need to consider whether their own security resources, supported by multiple third-party security vendors, will be powerful enough to meet emerging security challenges.

Among the options that need to be considered is whether the uniquely critical area of security is one that operators should consider buying in outright from security specialists, by way of an infrastructure-as-a-service (IaaS) model.

IaaS is typically no more controversial to the IT side of an operator's business than it is in the case of any other enterprise. But run IaaS past the network side of the house, and it certainly is controversial. Other than outsourcing backhaul or transport networks to third parties, there isn't much of a precedent for it. However, technology, and technology business models, are evolving rapidly now. The nature of evolving mobile security requirements demands a willingness to think outside the box.

You can learn more about this topic by reading the new white paper, "Evolving the Mobile Security Architecture Toward 5G."

— Patrick Donegan, Contributing Analyst, Heavy Reading

 

あなたが最近チェックしたレポート一覧

  • 最近チェックしたレポートはありません。

お問い合せは、お電話・メール・WEBから承ります。お見積もりの作成もお気軽にご相談ください。

webからのお問い合せはこちらのフォームから承ります

office@dri.co.jp

 

ページTOPに戻る