nanog mailing list archives
Re: 5G roadblock: labor
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka () seacom mu>
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2020 23:55:46 +0200
On 31/Dec/19 02:55, Ca By wrote:
Vendors are not interested in reducing costs to network operators, in general. They may have replaced NPUs with x86 to reduce their own costs....
I was just talking to some friends about this today, over a beer and some meat. We suffer the same problem in the IP world... revenues fall, data traffic explodes, margins decline; but capex costs remain the same, or even escalate. The ground is ripe for the young kids who can cobble together a mobile core based on merchant silicon, white boxes and community-driven code. If the vendors aren't going to follow what's happening with the operators, they'll have to be taken out. We already see how much Ericsson have downsized and re-focused. At some point, no one is going to want to pay for data access on their mobile, but they'll still need the connectivity to use their 2 favourite apps out of the 100's they barely touch on their phone. Garden-variety MNO operations have their days very numbered. Mark.
Current thread:
- Re: 5G roadblock: labor, (continued)
- Re: 5G roadblock: labor Paul Nash (Jan 03)
- Re: 5G roadblock: labor Radu-Adrian Feurdean (Jan 03)
- RE: 5G roadblock: labor Keith Medcalf (Jan 03)
- Re: 5G roadblock: labor Mark Tinka (Jan 03)
- Re: 5G roadblock: labor Radu-Adrian Feurdean (Jan 06)
- Re: 5G roadblock: labor Mark Tinka (Jan 03)
- Re: 5G roadblock: labor Christopher Morrow (Jan 03)
- Re: 5G roadblock: labor Mark Tinka (Jan 03)
- Re: 5G roadblock: labor Andrey Kostin (Jan 03)
- Re: 5G roadblock: labor Mark Tinka (Jan 03)
- Re: 5G roadblock: labor Mark Tinka (Jan 03)
- Re: 5G roadblock: labor Sabri Berisha (Jan 03)
- Re: 5G roadblock: labor Ca By (Jan 03)
- Re: 5G roadblock: labor William Herrin (Jan 03)
- Re: 5G roadblock: labor Ca By (Jan 03)
- Re: 5G roadblock: labor Joe Hamelin (Jan 06)