3GPP standards-based PCRF (Policy and Charging Rule Function) and PCEF (Policy and Charging Enforcement Function) complaint solutions got lots of attention recently. It seems that most mobile operators, when considering implementing DPI (and other service-aware network elements), will be using this architecture.
Operators are always seeking for non-proprietary solutions. This ensures flexibility when choosing vendors - either as 2nd source or when they will consider replacing the supplier. Using a standard-complaint solution does not necessarily ensure that, but it certainly helps.
In the table below I present a PCRF-DPI (acting as a PCEF) compatibility matrix by the leading DPI and most PCRF vendors. The compatibility indications are based on information found on the respective companies' web sites or press-releases.
In some cases, when a vendor shows a large TEM (such as Cisco) in his technology partners page it may be there because of other reasons, not necessarily for PCRF-DPI interoperability.
I welcome vendors’ representatives to comment and add to the table, by providing a links to official announcements.
Related posts:
- Policy Server Market - Still Small, but Always Optimistic! - here
- EU Helps Preventing Mobile Bill Shock - here
- Venezuela’s Movistar Deploys Volubill PCRF - here
PCRF Vendor | PCRF Product | Allot | Arbor | Cisco | Procera | Sandvine |
724 (Mobixell) | ● | ● | ||||
Bridgewater | ● | ● | ● | |||
Broadhop | ||||||
Camiant | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | |
Comptel | ||||||
Ericsson | ||||||
Flash Networks | ||||||
FTS | ● | ● | ||||
HP | ● | |||||
Huawei | ● | |||||
Kabira (Tibco software) | ● | |||||
Openet | ● | ● | ||||
Redknee | ● | |||||
Starent (Cisco) | ||||||
Telcordia | ||||||
Volubill | ||||||
ZTE | ● |
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment