When I read Network World magazine Josh Fruhlinge’s article “What is MPLS and Why It’s Not Dead Yet”, I must comment on a few network industry top clichés. These top clichés are still in SD-WAN vendor marketing messages and numerous industry publications. The right question is: What is a Private WAN, and Why It’s Not Deat Yet?

VoIP and QoS – Cliché No 1

The most common selling point for Private WAN (MPLS) against Private WAN (SD-WAN) has been the likely need for voice end-to-end quality management. To begin with, I just had a Teams meeting over the Internet where all the participants had consumer broadband or a hotel Internet, and the maximum distance was 9,500 km. The voice quality was perfect for an entire hour of the meeting. We have been using Internet voice calling apps for 15 years. The argument found in the Josh article for VoIP and QoS in the article is network cliché No: 1.

In reality, private WAN (MPLS) needed QoS to protect, e.g., VoIP protocol, because the capacity and speeds of the MPLS network were so modest. The enterprise WAN network was forced to limit other applications due to the small capacity and cost of the network. The need for QoS increased with the growth of Internet traffic and the hub and spoke architecture. Private WAN (MPLS) business caused the problem itself.

MPLS expensive and SD-WAN cheap – Cliché No 2

This subject may be valid with global connections and non-regulated areas; however, prices have come down through years of fierce competition in many geographical areas. It is not worth entering the European WAN market with such loose selling arguments.

The price comparison must be careful. Technically, we should compare symmetric business Internet connection + SLA agreement, which may be even more expensive than Private WAN (MPLS). Too often, the comparison is made to the home broadband without leasing cost of costly SD-WAN devices (both end), security-related licenses, monitoring, spare device, and SLA costs.

Admittedly, after the Covid-19 pandemic work from the home boom, I must say that home broadband solutions have been good enough for businesses. At the latest, it proves that the MPLS QoS argument is obsolete. It is also questionable whether it is worth burdening the costs of a small office with clustered routers or SD-WAN devices and SLA-secured subscriptions?  WFH is a good backup.

Will SD-WAN be needed in the future?

Private WAN (MPLS) can replace by Private WAN (SD-WAN over the Internet), but more important in architectural design is to ask: Is a private network needed and for how long?

In the last two months, we have read dozens of articles on the definition of Gartner SSE and its relationship to SASE. Some Cloud SASE vendors have criticized their SSE solution as their SASE solution, but without the Edge SD-WAN device. Yes, Correct. This network architect is a natural stage of development in the final stages of the SaaS transition.

How many CIOs plan to acquire a local, customized, and on-premise application requiring direct IP connectivity? Such a plan could be one reason to implement a private WAN. On the other hand, the market seems to be still on its way to the world of SaaS / Native Cloud. Such an architecture does not require an SD-WAN, but an SSE is required. This detail is one of the most critical questions when evaluating SASE solutions. Does your vendor offer a path to cloud-native SSE architecture?

Instead, I agree with the article’s claim that MPLS is a decades-old solution. The article accidentally describes one of the biggest security challenges on a private WAN (MPLS and most SD-WAN). Its castle & moat network architecture. The WAN network does not know what to carry, why, and whom? Such a network has no future in a secure digital world. Something completely different or SSE is needed.

The more relevant question for the CIOs is: What is a private WAN, and Why It’s Not Deat Yet?

Is private network need clichés no: 3?

 

Hannu Rokka, Senior Advisor

5Feet Networks Oy