SHARE



ABOUT THE AUTHOR


Tom Nolle
Tom Nolle is the president and founder of CIMI Corporation and the principal consultant/analyst. Tom started his career as a...
Read Full Bio >>
SHARE



Tom Nolle | April 23, 2015 |

 
   

The Management Dimension of Populism

The Management Dimension of Populism In our populist future, the easy management vision falls apart for two reasons: scale and virtualization.

In our populist future, the easy management vision falls apart for two reasons: scale and virtualization.

The services of the future might be more sophisticated than those of the present, but that sophistication will have to be invisible to the user ... or those services will fail. Networking is growing not because there are more Fortune 500 companies, but because every business, every consumer, is becoming network-dependent. No mass market can survive complexity, and what has to make things simple is management.

I remember 20 years ago when a reporter assigned the network management beat might as well lie down and cradle a rose. You made the front page when two executives of rival firms fought a duel with black-powder muskets ... or something like that. Even today, nothing chills an active discussion about the future of networks and services like the letters "OSS" or "BSS." Today, while most operators and even many vendors know that has to change, there's not much progress on the "how?" side.

Management practices have been fairly simple up to now. You build a network from devices, and the devices have ports and trunks and features that are represented in one or more data structures we call "MIBs" for "management information bases." You check MIB status periodically in an operations center to see if things are working or when you have a problem reported, and you take remedial action. It's simple.

Easy Management Unravels

In our populist future, this easy management vision falls apart for two reasons: scale and virtualization. Traditional network management had perhaps two hundred thousand consumers, all of which were at least mid-sized businesses, because that's how many network service consumers there were. Today we're looking at many billions of consumers, and at the price they'll pay for services there's simply no way that any human at any operations center is going to look at or fix anything. The stuff either has to be automated or it's fire-and-forget, meaning best-efforts.

Most of our management initiatives in the last 20 years have been aimed at the best-efforts goal. You don't manage services, you manage resources. You have infrastructure, you have service requests, and you have a service level you plan for. If you can keep the infrastructure running as your plan demands, you generate the service level you targeted. This used to be the basis of "directory-enabled networking," and it's still how much of the IP services/applications are managed.

Virtualization breaks that, along with a bunch of other management rules. A "service" or a "network" is now a collection of instances of functionality hosted on some pool of resources. Every service/network competes for the resource pot, and all of them are unaware of the others. Some require fairly stringent quality of experience and others not much at all; some are very valuable and others less so. This alone makes effective management of the resource pool hard to apply overall; you have to recognize at least all the individual classes of service.

It also makes that simple task of looking at an MIB tough. A real router in a network has an address and an MIB that offers its status. A virtual router might be smeared across a couple VMs on a couple servers connected with virtual and real switches. What's its status? How do you control it to fix something when the resources that actually host the functionality are shared with all those other services, applications, and users? Imagine a dozen users dialing up their bandwidth. Now imagine a couple billion, and you get the picture.

You can argue, I think, that management is the forgotten piece of the virtualization pie. Everyone seems to want to push it off into someone else's bailiwick. In Network Functions Virtualization (NFV), the ETSI team made operations out of scope, which means that anything different needed for NFV operations was now an orphan. Yes, there are other groups who could claim ownership of NFV operations, but it's not easy to manage an evolving NFV functional vision when someone else is doing the functional evolution.

Management Evolves

We do have some hints of how this has to work, though. First and foremost, we know that management of future services is really about service automation. You have to be able to create populist services in a "factory" where behaviors and their associated resources are stamped out like cookies. We know that stamping process has to include making all the necessary management connections to support whatever level of management we might want to impose.

We also know that the range of management options extend from per-customer-and-service management where we "see" and "control" (in software) detailed service behavior, to our best-efforts vision, where all we do is keep a resource pool running and hope for the best.

What this means is model-driven, composed, management practices. If a service is stamped out by a factory there has to be a blueprint, which means something that converts the parameters of an order into the desired output. That blueprint has to connect the management dots, and that's what's going to make getting to populist-ready management difficult. Right now, nobody at the standards level seems to be looking at those two tasks as a unit, and I don't see how it can be made to work if that unified vision isn't a given.

Good old-fashioned innovation at the vendor level might save us, but to get that we might have to forget the cherished notion of standardization. Why not? Facebook, Twitter, and most of the new services we've come to rely on were innovations that have been fit to standards selectively after the fact. Management of future services may have to follow that same course.

Read Tom Nolle's first post in his series on information populism on No Jitter: Why We Need a Populist Technology Revolution.

Follow Tom Nolle on Google+!
Tom Nolle on Google+





COMMENTS



August 16, 2017

Contact centers have long been at the leading edge of innovation in communications technology, given their promise of measurable ROI and the continual need to optimize customer interactions and sta

July 12, 2017

Enterprises have been migrating Unified Communications & Collaboration applications to datacenters - private clouds - for the past few years. With this move comes the opportunity to leverage da

May 31, 2017

In the days of old, people in suits used to meet at a boardroom table to update each other on their work. Including a remote colleague meant setting a conference phone on the table for in-person pa

August 16, 2017
World Vision U.S. is finding lots of goodness in RingCentral's cloud communications service, but as Randy Boyd, infrastructure architect at the global humanitarian nonprofit, tells us, he and his team....
August 11, 2017
Alicia Gee, director of unified communications at Sutter Physician Services, oversees the technical team supporting a 1,000-agent contact center running on Genesys PureConnect. She catches us up on th....
August 4, 2017
Andrew Prokop, communications evangelist with Arrow Systems Integration, has lately been working on integrating enterprise communications into Internet of Things ecosystems. He shares examples and off....
July 27, 2017
Industry watcher Elka Popova, a Frost & Sullivan program director, shares her perspective on this acquisition, discussing Mitel's market positioning, why the move makes sense, and more.
July 14, 2017
Lantre Barr, founder and CEO of Blacc Spot Media, urges any enterprise that's been on the fence about integrating real-time communications into business workflows to jump off and get started. Tune and....
June 28, 2017
Communications expert Tsahi Levent-Levi, author of the popular BlogGeek.me blog, keeps a running tally and comprehensive overview of communications platform-as-a-service offerings in his "Choosing a W....
June 9, 2017
If you think telecom expense management applies to nothing more than business phone lines, think again. Hyoun Park, founder and principal investigator with technology advisory Amalgam Insights, tells ....
June 2, 2017
Enterprises strategizing on mobility today, including for internal collaboration, don't have the luxury of learning as they go. Tony Rizzo, enterprise mobility specialist with Blue Hill Research, expl....
May 24, 2017
Mark Winther, head of IDC's global telecom consulting practice, gives us his take on how CPaaS providers evolve beyond the basic building blocks and address maturing enterprise needs.
May 18, 2017
Diane Myers, senior research director at IHS Markit, walks us through her 2017 UC-as-a-service report... and shares what might be to come in 2018.
April 28, 2017
Change isn't easy, but it is necessary. Tune in for advice and perspective from Zeus Kerravala, co-author of a "Digital Transformation for Dummies" special edition.
April 20, 2017
Robin Gareiss, president of Nemertes Research, shares insight gleaned from the firm's 12th annual UCC Total Cost of Operations study.
March 23, 2017
Tim Banting, of Current Analysis, gives us a peek into what the next three years will bring in advance of his Enterprise Connect session exploring the question: Will there be a new model for enterpris....
March 15, 2017
Andrew Prokop, communications evangelist with Arrow Systems Integration, discusses the evolving role of the all-important session border controller.
March 9, 2017
Organizer Alan Quayle gives us the lowdown on programmable communications and all you need to know about participating in this pre-Enterprise Connect hackathon.
March 3, 2017
From protecting against new vulnerabilities to keeping security assessments up to date, security consultant Mark Collier shares tips on how best to protect your UC systems.
February 24, 2017
UC analyst Blair Pleasant sorts through the myriad cloud architectural models underlying UCaaS and CCaaS offerings, and explains why knowing the differences matter.
February 17, 2017
From the most basics of basics to the hidden gotchas, UC consultant Melissa Swartz helps demystify the complex world of SIP trunking.
February 7, 2017
UC&C consultant Kevin Kieller, a partner at enableUC, shares pointers for making the right architectural choices for your Skype for Business deployment.
February 1, 2017
Elka Popova, a Frost & Sullivan program director, shares a status report on the UCaaS market today and offers her perspective on what large enterprises need before committing to UC in the cloud.
January 26, 2017
Andrew Davis, co-founder of Wainhouse Research and chair of the Video track at Enterprise Connect 2017, sorts through the myriad cloud video service options and shares how to tell if your choice is en....
January 23, 2017
Sheila McGee-Smith, Contact Center/Customer Experience track chair for Enterprise Connect 2017, tells us what we need to know about the role cloud software is playing in contact centers today.