I was going to point out VoLTE as an example of a system which runs over IP but still retains a lot of the concepts from circuit switched days. In theory (if you’re a network operator), you could expose dedicated bearer provisioning with QoS guarantees for applications to build on top of. I guess my point is that you can have tighter QoS control if you can get off the public internet and go through carrier IPX instead.

▲

g_p 16 hours ago | parent | next [-]

VoLTE and SIP do indeed retail a lot of the concepts of circuit switched. The challenge is that now you have the complexity of (seemingly invariably) a Telco managing a k8s stack on an OS they don't understand, and which has hundreds of CVEs per month they aren't patching. The failure modes of VoLTE/SIP are also a load more complex than CS domain issues - IMS interop issues and XML parsing delights await!

So I guess it's not only about getting off the internet - there is a real shift in complexity in these more modern stacks too.

	▲	catlifeonmars 8 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		You are not wrong about the complexity of modern stacks. However, VoLTE predates k8s adoption in most telcos and the physical network appliance == NF model is still alive and well, so it’s not necessarily a fair comparison. You’re also right about the added complexity of SIP/RTP (let’s agree not to talk about MMS lol).
	▲	wil421 11 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		That’s not true at all. Yes to the k8s but at least at my work we are scanned to death as soon as a new IP comes up on our network. Plus we have golden image updates at least every 30 days. We couldn’t even get SNMP traps out of our virtual firewalls because of “security”. Containers are 10x better than monitoring and supporting some 30 years old switch in a central office that consumes more power than my cul de sac.

▲

ssl-3 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I think you just described how the PSTN used to run, except this way has more layers.

	▲	catlifeonmars 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Welcome to VoLTE :)