Tags: LSO

In order to break away from the current ineffective OSS model, there must first be a proper separation of concerns.

The point which a lot of people are missing at the moment is that NFV MANO (network functions virtualization management and orchestration) and LSO (lifecycle service orchestration) are different.

What’s the difference?

The MANO is responsible for managing the network functions virtualization infrastructure. So it understands the capacity of the system and the utilization that's already been assigned to NFVs in normal operations. The most important difference between the NFV MANO and the LSO is that the MANO does not know the operating capabilities of the VNFs it is managing. To the MANO, a VNF is a VNF and that is all. It doesn't know or care whether a VNF is a virtual firewall, a virtual router, or a virtual voice-bridge; it just knows what the VNF requires to operate properly.

The LSO on the other hand, is capable of understanding the semantics attached to VNFs. While the MANO is responsible for ensuring proper NFV operation, the LSO is responsible for coordinating the specific workloads to fulfill service requests. For example, if a service is requested and a VNF firewall needs to be instantiated, the LSO will request the MANO to create the required firewall. The MANO doesn’t know that the VNF it is instantiating is a firewall, it just knows it’s instantiating a VNF. It’s the LSO that recognizes that firewall and understands how it’s interconnected to physical and logical network elements. This displays the interplay between the LSO and the MANO.


To learn more about NFV MANO and LSO through operational use cases watch the on-demand webinar, “NFV’s Biggest Barrier: Overcoming the Operations Challenge”.

New Call-to-action

Search Our Blog

Subscribe To Our Blog


Let us know what you thought about this post.

Leave your comment below.