Cloud-Enabled Deployment of 5G Core Network with Analytics Features

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This work presents a testbed implementation of a virtualized cloud-based deployment of the 5G network. In addition, the authors have extended the existing implementation with an additional network function, denoted as quasi-NEF. The topic under study is timely, however the paper seems more like a technical report with guidelines for the implementation of the testbed. Some more specific comments:

1) The presentation of the paper needs significant improvement, as there are several typos, grammar errors, random use of tenses, etc. (e.g., "softwareisation", "We perform...Finally, we proposed", PoC is used without definition (it is defined in the following paragraph), etc.)

2) It is not clear if the problem in Sec. 5.1 is a general problem in cloud-native networks or a particular implementation of Open5GS. This should be clarified, as it is very important and affects the contribution of this work. In any case, Sec. 5.1 should be presenting as "problem statement" and be written in a more appropriate way.

3) The same (as in comment 2) holds also for Sec. 5.2, as now the scientific value of this proposed solution is not clear.

4) The paper seems more like a technical report, explaining in detail all the technical steps, rather than a scientific work. The authors should have focused more on their actual implementations and their added value.

5) PoC is the actual experiment that proves some concept. In this case the authors use PoC to describe their testbed, something that is confusing

6) The authors mention 26 NFs, but these functions are not presented (should be somehow in line with Fig.1, because now it is confusing)

7) Resolution of figures (e.g. Fig. 2) is low

8) The different configurations (i.e., Listings) could be included in some appendix, as they break the flow of the paper.

9) There are no results to evaluate or show the impact of the proposed solution.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Please see the general comments, as comments about the presentation and the use of English have been included there.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In the paper titled “Cloud-enabled deployment of 5G core network with additional analytics features” authors propose cloud based 5G core network. The article needs major organization/presentation changes with the following points.

·       The title is confusing. I don’t think there is the need to add the word “additional”.

·       The introduction has very few references and there are paragraphs with no reference.

·       The contributions should be listed in the introduction in form of points/bullets.

·       There are several studies that can be added to the background section such as

To transcode or not? A machine learning based edge video caching and transcoding strategy (Computers and Electrical Engineering )

·       Why VirtualBox hypervisor is chosen for the PoC rather than server level virtualization softwares?

·       There is discussion of AI and data analytics in the abstract and introduction. In the rest of the article, I don’t find it anywhere.

 

·       How can the performance of the proposed 5G core network be tested? 5G networks are supposed to provide ultra low latency. The article does not provide any discussion on the performance. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In this revised version, the authors have improved the structure and the writing in some parts and the paper has been improved. However, the most important issues that did not permit the acceptance of the paper in the previous round still exist. More specifically, the presentation and the writing of the paper needs further improvement (e.g., the authors present the contribution in the introduction in past tense, the SoA is presented in an inconsistent manner either in past or in present, AI is mentioned only in the abstract/intro, etc.). In addition, there is no motivation in the introduction about the need of such study. Finally, even though this work is presented as a technical report, the reader would expect to see results about the implementation of the testbed and the performance of the network (even if no specific KPIs are to be achieved).

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Please see the generic comments. Writing needs further improvement.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have revised the article. However, i think the contribution list at the end of the introduction can be summarized with only 3-4 items to highlight main contributions.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have improved the presentation of their work and they have added some basic results for their implementation. Some minor issues that could further improve the paper and highlight its contribution are as follows:

1) Appendix appears inside the references, it should be better if it was before or after them.

2) The references do not have the same format. In addition, there are several relevant recent works (5G core and 5G/6G testbeds) that are not cited in this work, e.g.:

i) B. Hortiguela et al., “Realizing the network service federation vision: Enabling automatedmultidomain orchestration of network services,” IEEE
Veh. Technol. Mag., vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 48–57, Jun. 2020.

ii) M. Dalgitsis et al., "Cloud-Native Orchestration Framework for Network Slice Federation Across Administrative Domains in 5G/6G Mobile Networks," in IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 73, no. 7, pp. 9306-9319, July 2024

iii) S. D. A. Shah, M. A. Gregory, and S. Li, “Cloud-native network slicing
using software defined networking based multi-access edge computing: A survey,” IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 10903–10924, 2021

iv) P. Trakadas et al., "A Cost-Efficient 5G Non-Public Network Architectural Approach: Key Concepts and Enablers, Building Blocks and Potential Use Cases", Sensors, vol.21, no.16, August 2021

v) I. Sarrigiannis et al., "Online VNF Lifecycle Management in an MEC-Enabled 5G IoT Architecture," in IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 4183-4194, May 2020

vi) P. -V. Mekikis et al., "NFV-Enabled Experimental Platform for 5G Tactile Internet Support in Industrial Environments," in IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 1895-1903, March 2020

vii) J. Wu, Y. Gao, L. Wang, J. Zhang and D. O. Wu, "How to Allocate Resources in Cloud-Native Networks Towards 6G," in IEEE Network, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 240-246, March 2024

viii) I. Sarrigiannis et al., "Cost-Aware Placement and Enhanced Lifecycle Management of Service Function Chains in a Multidomain 5G Architecture," in IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 5006-5020, Dec. 2022

ix) A. Boutouchent et al., "AMANOS: An Intent-Driven Management and Orchestration System for Next-Generation Cloud-Native Networks," in IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 42-49, June 2024

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Please see the detailed comments.

Author Response

Comments 1: Appendix appears inside the references, it should be better if it was before or after them.

Response 1: We agree that an appendix containing listing should be placed before or after the references. However, we did everything according to the journal template, without modifying template it is not possible to change the resulting layout. We will mention that issue to the editorial office to make sure that the layout will be fixed in the final version. 

 

Comments 2: The references do not have the same format. In addition, there are several relevant recent works (5G core and 5G/6G testbeds) that are not cited in this work, e.g.: ...

We fixed the formatting of the references making them fully consistent. 

Thank you for suggesting additional references, making our work more comprehensive and valuable. We carefully analyzed proposed works, selected six that best fit our article, and cited them in the revised version of the manuscript. 

Added references:

ii) M. Dalgitsis et al., "Cloud-Native Orchestration Framework for Network Slice Federation Across Administrative Domains in 5G/6G Mobile Networks," in IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 73, no. 7, pp. 9306-9319, July 2024

iii) S. D. A. Shah, M. A. Gregory, and S. Li, “Cloud-native network slicing
using software defined networking based multi-access edge computing: A survey,” IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 10903–10924, 2021

v) I. Sarrigiannis et al., "Online VNF Lifecycle Management in an MEC-Enabled 5G IoT Architecture," in IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 4183-4194, May 2020

vi) P. -V. Mekikis et al., "NFV-Enabled Experimental Platform for 5G Tactile Internet Support in Industrial Environments," in IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 1895-1903, March 2020

vii) J. Wu, Y. Gao, L. Wang, J. Zhang and D. O. Wu, "How to Allocate Resources in Cloud-Native Networks Towards 6G," in IEEE Network, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 240-246, March 2024

viii) I. Sarrigiannis et al., "Cost-Aware Placement and Enhanced Lifecycle Management of Service Function Chains in a Multidomain 5G Architecture," in IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 5006-5020, Dec. 2022