4_Network Function Virtualization
4_Network Function Virtualization
1. Introduction
In this tutorial, we’ll study the Network Function Virtualization (NFV) paradigm. We
probably already noted that the Internet has become relevant in everyday life, with many essential
services being provided online.
The core network is the underlying infrastructure that supports the Internet. In there, several
appliances work to enable connections and data exchange. These appliances, however, are
typically implemented in hardware. So, the main proposal of the NFV paradigm is to migrate core
network appliances from a hardware plane to a software plane.
In the following section, we’ll examine the main motivations, benefits, and challenges of migrating
the networks from a hardware-based plane to a software plane. So, we’ll discuss some architectural
and technical aspects of the NFV paradigm. Finally, we’ll summarize the NFV concepts and
present final remarks.
To do that, NFV can employ several different virtualization technologies. Examples of such
technologies are full virtualization, para-virtualization, containerization, and process-based
virtualization.
So, multiple virtual elements can work in single commodity hardware providing network functions
and other network core-related services.
Of course, migrating from a hardware-based appliances model to software-based network
functions brings multiple challenges. The most prominent is dealing with performance drops
caused by using general-purpose equipment with many virtualization layers.
But, the research and industry communities have been proposing several solutions to the
performance challenges regarding network traffic processing. For instance, we can highlight
the network processing acceleration tools (Intel DPDK, netmap, among others).
One question, however, remains: why decouple network functions from their dedicated hardware?
The NFV paradigm aims to improve the network core manageability, flexibility, and mobility.
So, we will be able to create networks from scratch by using commodity hardware. Moreover, it
will be possible to update/upgrade network functions without buying new hardware or even
migrating them across domains by only exchanging virtual element images.
Finally, by achieving the previously cited objectives, NFV also expects to reduce the overall
CAPEX and OPEX to maintain the core network.
In particular, we can highlight some relevant operational blocks of the previously stated domains:
Virtualized Infrastructure Manager (VIM – from NFV MANO): block that works with the
VI domain to provide the required computational resources for the NFV environment
Virtualized Network Function Manager (VNFM – from NFV MANO): block that
cooperates with the VNF domain to manage virtualized network function instances
NFV Orchestrator (NFVO – from NFV MANO): block that, together with the VNFM, can
orchestrate sets of network functions to provide complex network services
Virtualized Network Function (VNF – from VNF): block that indicates the instances of
VNF platforms executing network functions
Element Management System (EMS – from VNF): block that acts as a management
gateway between different VNF platforms and other domains of the NFV architecture
It is relevant to highlight there exists an architecture to implement and execute virtualized network
services. This architecture is proposed by the IETF and contains several elements.
4. Conclusion
Computer networks have become essential for modern societies. Several tasks regarding
communication, commerce, and everyday living depend on computer networks to be
accomplished.
However, the core network itself did not evolve as fast as the number of users using it. It happened
due to a series of reasons. One important reason is the core network inflexibility and the high costs
of updating and upgrading its appliances.
In such a way, the NFV paradigm emerged, proposing to decouple the network functions from
their dedicated hardware, thus deploying them in a software plane enabled by virtualization
technologies and commodity hardware.
Thus, in this tutorial, we studied this innovative paradigm. First, we investigated the current state
of the core network and the potential problems related to it. So, we examined general concepts of
the NFV paradigm. Finally, we saw the technical details of NFV, understanding how it allows the
creation, execution, and management of network functions and services.
We can conclude that NFV represents a paradigm shift in telecommunications. There exist
several challenges to be addressed until NFV gets popular in production networks. However, the
flexibility and reduced capital and operational costs of NFV make it a promising alternative for
the near future.