![]() ![]()
![]() NFV aims to virtualize all physical network resources beneath a hypervisor, which allows the network to grow without the addition of more devices. In this approach, the control plane decides where to send traffic, while the hardware continues to direct and handle the traffic. SDN abstracts physical networking resources –switches, routers and so on – and moves decision making to a virtual network control plane. SDN and NFV differ in how they separate functions and abstract resources. SDN further allows configuration and behavior to be programmatically defined and modified. Thus, NFV provides basic networking functions, while SDN controls and orchestrates them for specific uses. At the same time, SDN's networking control functions for routing, policy definition and applications run in a virtual machine somewhere on the network. When SDN executes on an NFV infrastructure, SDN forwards data packets from one network device to another. #Similarities between hardware and software softwareThus, both depend heavily on virtualization to enable network design and infrastructure to be abstracted in software and then implemented by underlying software across hardware platforms and devices. SDN seeks to separate network control functions from network forwarding functions, while NFV seeks to abstract network forwarding and other networking functions from the hardware on which it runs. The core similarity between software-defined networking (SDN) and network functions virtualization (NFV) is that they both use network abstraction. I just happen to be less familiar with those.While there has been much talk about the power of bringing virtualization to the network, confusion abounds about two different but related approaches: software-defined networking and network functions virtualization. All of the lessons from the move to micro-services could be very quickly applied to management system processes including: error management, fault tolerance, and monitoring.Īll of this is not to overlook the extra complexities of management systems where people are the primary executors. The Top Management functions, choosing software process direction and evaluating the effectiveness, are handled by the Product Owner.įormal Management System procedures could be treated as software, with some level of unit and regression testing. Complaint handling and CAPA are your bug tracking system, software internal audit is basically the regression test suites. The training system is the compilation and deployment processes (note: “training” computer systems is much more predictable). The documentation system is the source control system (like git). There are so many analogues to software engineering. ![]() #Similarities between hardware and software how toThe major distinction is that one executes via teams of people whereas the other on machines.įormal Management Systems focus on establishing documented activities, defining how to change them, and determining how to evaluate them. This was almost certainly adopted by the original operating systems developers as it was certainly their goal to apply software to business problems. Operating systems procedures and processes match their management system counterparts definition. These things could not fit together much better.Įven the terminology matches. Software engineering is the process by which software eventually achieves that goal. Computer science is all about solving problems with the fewest resources. ![]() Improvement is almost always the name of the game. I spend my time between software development and management system development, and the similarities have never been clearer.īusiness is about getting things done in a sustainable way. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |