The vision advanced by proponents of multi-access edge computing includes new roles for a variety of potential ecosystem providers, ranging from hyperscale computing as a service providers to data center operators; connectivity service providers to neutral host access providers.
All sorts of hardware and software infrastructure providers also are fundamental in any scenario, to supply central processing units, memory, artificial intelligence or analytical capabilities, racks and other associated gear.
The range of potential data center providers also includes some non-traditional providers such as very large retailers who might allow third parties to use edge computing capabilities originally developed to support internal operations.
The issue for all potential providers is “how big” the edge computing opportunity might be as a driver of new revenue, which roles make most sense and are most feasible.
At a high level, the domains include computing hardware and software (CPUs, memory, racks, power supplies); edge facilities (real estate); turned up computing as a service, storage as a service or platform as a service.
“Platform as a service” often is hardest to comprehend, as most observers understand the value and role of CPU/memory (core compute); real estate (data centers) or fully hosted software as a service. Of course, that always is the case whenever choices are made somewhere between “do it all yourself” and “buy a fully-managed service.”
At this point, it is too early to predict which current participants in the ecosystem will emerge in new roles in edge computing, and to what extent. Nor is it clear how much additional value or revenue edge computing will drive for various suppliers in various roles.
It already seems clear that, ultimately, edge computing is still about “computing,” and that means significant upside for hyperscalers and some data center providers. How much “platform” operations will be important for connectivity providers is not yet clear, but some of us who have watched telco innovation efforts over decades might say tempered expectations are realistic.
Telcos have not generally been highly successful at entering new ecosystem roles in computing or applications. That might be even more true in an era of open source, open networks (the internet) and virtualized platforms and networks where scale economics prevail.
In a closed environment, telcos might have exercised more control. That is largely impossible when “connectivity” is functionally separated from all the other platform functions (storage, servers, operating systems, middleware and runtime environments as well as from applications, data ownership and end-user-facing business models.
MEC might be important for connectivity service providers, at least to support their own virtualized core network and access network operations. How much incremental value MEC can provide others in the ecosystem has to be determined. That, in turn, will determine how big a revenue generator MEC might be, for connectivity service providers.
No comments:
Post a Comment