Light Reading - Telecom News, Analysis, Events, and Research
Sign up for our Free Telecom Weekly Newsletter
Connect with us

Telecom News Analysis  

DT's All-Cisco, No-Optical Network

no ratings
1 saves

The new Deutsche Telekom AG (NYSE: DT) architecture, TeraStream, skips using optical equipment and might be using a new Cisco Systems Inc. (Nasdaq: CSCO) 100Gbit/s optical interface, according to a description from a source familiar with the specifics.

DT is also taking advantage of the IPv6 header for storing policy-related information, thus letting services assign policy based on a quick glance at the header.

It's no surprise that TeraStream would try some newfangled ideas. That was the point, after all. TeraStream is a modernized architecture that runs on IPv6 only -- no ATM or Frame Relay -- and exploits cloud-networking concepts. All services in the network are handled by virtual appliances in the data center, an arrangement that smacks of software-defined networking (SDN).

The first TeraStream rendition is running in Croatia, where Hrvatski Telekom, a DT subsidiary, is using it to deliver residential services. The pilot went live on Dec. 10. (See DT's Croatia Unit Taps Cisco.)

Cisco, which is supplying the TeraStream gear, made that announcement and detailed quite a bit about TeraStream's inner workings. For instance, Cisco is supplying the data centers for TeraStream, basing them on the Unified Computing System (UCS) architecture.

But our source, who didn't want to be named, seems to think the finer points of TeraStream have gone unappreciated. So let's take a look at what's under the hood.

No Optics Allowed (Almost)
TeraStream goes whole hog with IP over DWDM (IPoDWDM), meaning the optical transceivers are directly on the routers, eliminating the need for transponder shelves. There are no optical subsystems in the network at all, save for passive splitters and EDFAs, according to the source.

Those IPoDWDM interfaces apparently run at 100 Gbit/s, which brings up the possibility that they're based on Cisco's new, homemade transceiver format called the CPAK. It's a smaller alternative to the CFP, and it's come out earlier than the CFP2, the "official" smaller-than-CFP format.

Cisco hasn't officially acknowledged the CPAK, but as of November, sources inside the company were telling Light Reading its launch was imminent.

If CPAK isn't already in TeraStream, it's probably going to get there soon; the source says DT is hoping the use of silicon photonics will bring 100Gbit/s and 400Gbit/s pluggable transceivers below the $10,000 level. CPAK is assumed to be using silicon photonics that Cisco acquired with Lightwire. (See Lightwire Points Cisco Toward 100G and Silicon Photonics Signals Red Alert for 100G .)

The TeraStream architecture was drawn up by Peter Löthberg and Guenter Honisch, the source speculates. Honisch is part of DT's office of the CTO, while Löthberg is an optical networking legend known for, among other things, bringing a 40Gbit/s connection to his mom's house.

Here's the full text of what Light Reading was sent last week. We've broken it into paragraphs for readability.

Terastream, believed to be the brainchild of Lothberg & Honisch, completely integrates the whole carrier network and datacenter.

The network is designed with only two layers of routers. One set of routers are used for customer aggregation and all policy, and the other to combine the functions for core, peering and datacenter switching/interconnect. The internal network is IPv6 only.

Traffic type is encoded into the IPv6 addresses, allowing policy processing for different services through a single ip lookup (eg. labels moved to the addresses).

All the transport links in the network use 100G coherent optics tightly integrated with the routers. One can guess Lothberg is behind this and some information indicates that he is working on the assumption that silicon-optics will be able to make pluggable 100G/400G transceiver for less than $10K. The design has removed all optical subsystems and reduced the whole transport to passive splitters and EDFA amplifiers in a completely colorless drop-and waste model.

All protection is IPv6 based. QOS model is turned around with bidirectional policing at the edges.

Two modes of operation are provided, one IPv6 native and the other a Metro-Ethernet MEF compliant customer facing service utilizing IPv6 transport encapsulation and full Y.1731 support.

By using IPv6 the design can interconnect a network endpoint directly to an application running on a VM in the cloud datacenter, IPv6 also allows direct addressing of a logical port, rather than having content context in the encapsulation header.

All traditional network services are moved from the network to the network-centric datacenters. In a presentation done by Honisch he said the services were provided by "virtual appliances" and indicated that "buying appliances and service blades as a software license."

— Craig Matsumoto, Managing Editor, Light Reading

Newest Comments First       Display in Chronological Order
Page 1 of 2 Next >
Craig Matsumoto
User Ranking
Tuesday December 18, 2012 8:43:41 PM
no ratings

Thanks, Sailboat -- good input. Yeah, I'm speculating a lot on what Lightwire can do, so you could be right about them not being ready for the line side yet.  I'd be really surprised if they're not being used on the client side here, though.

Craig Matsumoto
User Ranking
Tuesday December 18, 2012 8:42:15 PM
no ratings

> Prediction: Electro-optical networking in the physical layer will be a trend for 2013.

A prediction! And a new breed of electro-optical devices... I like it. We'll have to keep an eye on that, then -- thanks for the input, Greg.

Craig Matsumoto
User Ranking
Tuesday December 18, 2012 8:29:47 PM
no ratings

acohn: > Peter seems to really hate MPLS .... They should take the DWDM bit, and replace the IPv6 bit with MPLS.

Nice analysis of the IPv6/MPLS tradeoff. Thanks.

On the surface, it sounds like they went with IPv6 because of the extra uses they put the address space to. But I guess they give up some of those MPLS capabilities in doing so -- the lookups being cheaper, for instance.

sailboat
User Ranking
Tuesday December 18, 2012 8:51:31 AM
no ratings

Hello,

The article speculated that the Lightwire acquisition was the technology source behind the new 100g ports.  NOT.

the lightwire technology, while interesting, is not suitable for line side optics.  And, it is still only a 10G x several wavelengths.  Useful in shorter reach applications like enterprise and data centers (so the Data Center play from Cisco which is part of this deal could be using Lightwire for rack to rack interconnect for instance).  But line side optics from lightwire?  nope, not there yet,.... not for a good while to come.

far more likely is the fruition of the development work that has been going on at the old CoreOptics over the last year or so.  The CoreO technology is perfectly suited to helping reduce form factor for the 100G line side and allow direct active DWDM optics onto the line cards for the routers.  

Probably they have 2 versions of interfaces that are both "100g"... one that is only 10 x 10G from lighwire for shorter reaches and one that is truly 100G DWDM with tunable optics for line side.

IMHO

sailboat

EtherealMind
User Ranking
Tuesday December 18, 2012 5:15:07 AM

I would think that this network is using a new generation of products that aren't announced yet. Think about electro-optical devices that are carrying the backbone instead of the conventional "routers & DWDMs". 

Prediction: Electro-optical networking in the physical layer will be a trend for 2013. 

 

acohn
User Ranking
Tuesday December 18, 2012 2:37:15 AM
no ratings

Peter really seems to hate MPLS.

Sprint by refusing MPLS was married to Cisco, delivering funky features late (compared to competitors running MPLS) such as 'MPLS VPN over IP tunnels' (which has nothing to do with MPLS, config-wise it looks same, but tunneling is done by IPv4 not MPLS).

Certainly you can tunnel L3 VPN and L2 VPN over IPv6 or MPLS. You can do FRR, LFA over IPV6 just the same. 

But you absolutely shouldn't. MPLS lookup is cheaper than IPv6 lookup. MPLS functionality is standardizes, interoperates and ships. MPLS is 32bits, IPV6 is 128bits, causing higher MTU use. It would make sense, if you could extract some value from it, but you cannot. Tunneling is tunneling.

 

DWDM to router is otoh is solid idea in many deployments, but certainly not novel idea, it's been done for decades. And probably by this agenda, people managed to fool DTAG into believing the whole show is OPEX/CAPEX cheaper than their own design. They should take the DWDM bit, and replace the IPv6 bit with MPLS.

Craig Matsumoto
User Ranking
Monday December 17, 2012 8:26:45 PM
no ratings

> If they are using passive splitters, etc. it sounds like they are launching the waves from the router.

Yes, and your point about granularity is well taken.  If DT is willing to talk more, I'd be curious why they don't see that as a problem.

Craig Matsumoto
User Ranking
Monday December 17, 2012 8:25:38 PM
no ratings

> Note that it seems they're using the IP address instead of the IPv6 option space (which is nicely designed, unlike today's IPv4 or TCP option space).  I can't speak towards QoS (or any real details on the implementations I'm using), but when you control one or both ends of the IPv6 connection it's quite nice to use the extra "whitespace" for encoding other data....

So much more to IPv6 than just bigger addresses.  Thanks, JD.

dwx
User Ranking
Monday December 17, 2012 5:30:07 PM
no ratings

If they are using passive splitters, etc. it sounds like they are launching the waves from the router.  The issue with that right now is the density for IPoDWM is terrible.  The CRS is at 1x100G per slot versus 4x100G for current transponder based setups.  Other vendors like Juniper and ALU aren't even bothering with it until the packaging makes sense.   Unless they are just mapping a 1:1 transponder port to a wavelength and then into a passive setup.  Seems like it would be difficult to manage in some situations.  

jdbower
User Ranking
Monday December 17, 2012 3:41:09 PM
no ratings

Note that it seems they're using the IP address instead of the IPv6 option space (which is nicely designed, unlike today's IPv4 or TCP option space).  I can't speak towards QoS (or any real details on the implementations I'm using), but when you control one or both ends of the IPv6 connection it's quite nice to use the extra "whitespace" for encoding other data.  This breaks down if you're encapsulating actual IPv6 clients or if you don't own either end of the IPv6 address, but I can certainly see that routing may need to become a bit more complicated than just most-significant-bit-first routing. Dealing with subnets that aren't just a bunch of ones followed by a bunch of zeros adds a lot of power to IPv6 since you could pull out that bits 91-95 are to determine QoS, 96-100 are to fine tune local load balancing, 101-128 are for content identitication, etc.

Page 1 of 2 Next >
The blogs and comments are the opinions only of the writers and do not reflect the views of Light Reading. They are no substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose.