Light Reading
Once called "the new Ethernet," Carrier Ethernet 2.0 still hasn't been widely adopted.

Is 2014 the Year of Carrier Ethernet 2.0?

Dan O'Shea
1/3/2014
100%
0%

Will 2014 be the year that the Metro Ethernet Forum's Carrier Ethernet 2.0 becomes widely adopted among service providers? For something once touted as "the new Ethernet," it's been a bust.

It has been almost two years since the MEF, along with Ethernet Godfather Bob Metcalfe, announced CE 2.0. Yet, 23 months later, the MEF's services registry lists only 14 service providers globally as offering CE 2.0-certified services (See MEF Sticks a '2.0' on Carrier Ethernet.)

There might be more who are not yet listed, still in the process of being certified, or even still in the process for network deployment. In fact, while many of us were on holiday late last month, Hutchison Global Communications Ltd. (HGC) and vendor partner Cisco Systems Inc. (Nasdaq: CSCO) announced plans to launch the first CE 2.0-compliant network in Hong Kong, which is also believed to be the first CE 2.0 network in the broader region of Asia outside of Indonesia and the Philippines.

The relatively low number of CE 2.0-certified service providers pales in comparison to at least 73 that are CE 1.0-certified, according to the MEF website. Meanwhile, 29 vendors are listed as having their equipment CE 2.0-certified, compared to 81 for CE 1.0. It doesn't seem like vendors have felt rushed to adopt CE 2.0 either, perhaps because a large number of their service-provider customers just haven't demanded it.

CE 2.0 expanded the number of Ethernet service definitions to eight -- two each under the E-Line, E-LAN, E-Tree, and E-Access service categories -- while adding further support for interconnection and management, as well as performance objectives for multiple classes of service (MultiCoS). These are all aspects which would seem valuable as providers in an increasingly competitive sector look to differentiate their services, and also as they look to expand their reach into new markets via interconnection agreements.

But, with low adoption, the most obvious assumptions to make are that MultiCoS guarantees just haven't surfaced yet as market necessities, and that providers don’t yet feel the need for standardized interconnection as they branch out. That reality seems to buttress some providers' early skepticism about MultiCoS. (See Carriers Not Cheering Complex Class of Service.)

It looks like a Heavy Reading Insider report from mid-2012 called it correctly when it stated, according to a survey of service provider officials, that many didn't see their companies likely to adopt CE 2.0 any time before 2014. Well, it's 2014, and if CE 2.0 is to be of value at the services level, it's time to prove it (See Operators Like CE 2.0 – So Far.)

— Dan O'Shea, Managing Editor, Light Reading

(18)  | 
Comment  | 
Print  | 
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
t.bogataj
50%
50%
t.bogataj,
User Rank: Light Sabre
1/7/2014 | 3:00:56 AM
Re: MEF
Dan, this one is simple. Just recall the lifespan of the ATM forum; they renamed to MEF (well, officially they formed it) when they realised that ATM was loosing against Ethernet.

T.
sam masud
50%
50%
sam masud,
User Rank: Light Sabre
1/6/2014 | 10:19:49 AM
Re: MEF
The comment about "Getting back" to CE was most apropos. Also, I've wondered for a long time why the organization goes by the MEF moniker--you'd think they would call themselves something like Carrier Ethernet Forum or Ethernet Services Forum....Just a thought...

But on second thought, I guess they put "Metro" in there because that is really what CE is all about, meaning providing Ethernet connectivity to customers, from the first mile and into the metro.
Cellco
50%
50%
Cellco,
User Rank: Moderator
1/6/2014 | 8:49:04 AM
Re: MEF
Dan, you have an excellent idea to change the name to more inclusive service offerings.  The Cellular industry adopted use of MEF-22 and MEF-8 as an example.  There are many solutions available from the work at MEF across multiple service provider lineage architectures. 
Cellco
50%
50%
Cellco,
User Rank: Moderator
1/6/2014 | 8:46:39 AM
Re: Are the skeptics cheering?
Correct on OSMINE, I rejected the PO and worked with others solicited by BELLCORE/Telcordia to reject OSMINE process for PON.  I was responsible for the EMS development on our end. 

Again correct on Asia, just like Verizon and AFC were not the only PON activity, ITU is not the only place standards are developed. 

Do not be so sensitive.  I am not wrong just because I worked with companies other than AFC and Verizon.  There are many paths to go by, just like the delay of PON was not only due to UNE-L regulatory status, it took Triennial review, several NPRMs and a couple of court cases in parallel to create the delay. 

Today, we have no less than five state open proceedings, three active court cases and 7 open FCC actions in parallel to further prevent resale of incumbent plant.
brookseven
50%
50%
brookseven,
User Rank: Light Sabre
1/6/2014 | 1:24:28 AM
Re: Are the skeptics cheering?
Cellco,

You are wrong about the reason for the elimination of OSMINE, since it technically was not eliminated.  TIRKS was still used and that is part of the OSMINE process.  I don't believe any PON provisioning tools were ever created under OSMINE.  So, Verizon created its own instead of having the former Telcordia do it.  Of course, AFC already complied with OSMINE so TIRKS was no problem.  

The Asian installations were EPON and therefore did not require any ITU specifications as they were IEEE compliant.

seven

 
DOShea
50%
50%
DOShea,
User Rank: Blogger
1/5/2014 | 9:09:31 PM
MEF
Getting back to Carrier Ethernet, when is the Metro Ethernet Forum going to get around to changing its name?
Cellco
50%
50%
Cellco,
User Rank: Moderator
1/5/2014 | 3:01:34 PM
Re: Are the skeptics cheering?
I can stand by my account and I do not think yours is much different than mine.  AFC did a great job with it's penetration into Rural telcos later on, where competition was underway.  As I said, I was able to travel to the installations through 2002 and lived adjacent to a 2001 installation (your right, not AFC).   They were not trials.

The installations in Asia prior to 2003 were not technically PON because the chipsets on-board for the 2000, 2001 and most of the 2002 were *manufactured before 983.x ratification.  The dba, sur, one other annex did not start until 2002.   I do not know when ITU ratified 984.x but we did not start our contributions until early 2001. 

We agree OSMINE was not used and I maintain not relavent because nobody wanted to pay and wait for the process at that time, certainly no need to as the regulatory environment for those obligated to resale would not proceed. 
brookseven
50%
50%
brookseven,
User Rank: Light Sabre
1/5/2014 | 12:21:08 PM
Re: Are the skeptics cheering?
Cellco,

Wow, Calix got their PON solution from their purchase of OSI.  AFC where I ran a large number of things were working on a proof of concept in 02.  I know for a fact that the first time any customer saw the AFC product was at Supercomm 03 where there was a demo in the booth.

In Asia, the deployment was EPON in Japan and Korea and by none of those vendors you named.  

As to OSMINE, Verizon did its own OSS environment in Tampa other than TIRKS.

So, your facts are completely wrong on the topic.  The first large scale FTTH deployments were Korea, Japan and FiOS.  

I am completely opinionless on CE 2.0.  But if you are using your statements about PON as credibility then you have a problem.

If you want some better evidence in timeline, please read http://wp.me/p3XVhG-3c.  This blog is written by the former CTO of AFC.

seven
Cellco
50%
50%
Cellco,
User Rank: Moderator
1/5/2014 | 11:21:11 AM
Re: Are the skeptics cheering?
Seven,  Yes, I got to work on PON as well, (infact Light Reading was quite a flaming board back when I started reading and afraid to post because our IT dept managed R&D eng activity). I was and suspect you were in ITU writing, I was working on NEC chipset for a couple pre-983.x versions and then bringing it back into final, then the Annexes; then into 984.x Annexes, then working to get Expo, Anritsu, Agilent and Tektronix good information on our test suites for OLT and ONUs then working on Corning, Rational, National Instruments to create the test suites, and carriers to discern the lack of interest in 983.x and more of an interest in 984. 

During late 2001 and through 2002, I was able to go out to several telcos in USA but also Asia Pacific to see where Tut, TerraWave, Calix, AllOptix, AFC were having success and no-longer trial sites.  I was able to mediate the value of going through OSMINE a new process BELLCORE was trying to get more outside parties to buy into.  So yes in 2002-2004 there were just a few telcos, not tied to resale obligations (or not so concerned).

The bulk buyers that needed to go through checklist of CGL, QuESTForum and get the nomenclature into Common Language (but manage avoiding OSMINE) were able to use the period up-until release from resale obligations to get all that work done.  It is a good thing they did because the 983.x bit rate was nowhere near performing to what could be achieved in 984.x.

That brings us back to the point of CE 2.0.  There is no rush what-so-ever to get the product into Common Language, complete QuEST Forum etc...  The thought of having to expense ICA capable OSS support in addtion to Wholesale or VNO tools is too precious.  Give them a couple more years to work ICA into Wholesale/VNO rules and tools, then you will see the move from the interim steps into robust CE 2.0.
brookseven
50%
50%
brookseven,
User Rank: Light Sabre
1/4/2014 | 12:32:49 PM
Re: Are the skeptics cheering?
Cellco,

Given that I worked on the PON product, I can tell you that the first AFC PON offering was a proof of concept first shown at the Supercomm 03 show.  So, no there was little to no PON deployments in 02 in the US.  Folks like OSI were the leaders and were tiny companies.

As to the regulatory topic, remember one of the big reasons for PON deployment was that unbundling is not required for FTTP networks (nor for FTTC if limited to 500' or less of copper).

So, your comment that regulatory slowed down PON is wrong and the fiber unbundling change (aka UNE-L) was before 04.

seven

 
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
More Blogs from DOS Attack
The emergence of an industrial enterprise customer for Infinera revives a long-standing question.
Optical transport vendors are finding growing business opportunities with web content firms even as their overall market shrinks.
Intel buys ARM processor assets to make it better equipped for the future of mobile equipment and SDN-enabled data center gear.
A Juniper Networks poll finds a little more than half the companies surveyed have SDN deployment plans, while the rest have none.
The 25G Gigabit Ethernet Consortium looks like a case of companies moving to establish a default standard where the standards process has failed so far.
Flash Poll
From The Founder
It's clear to me that the communications industry is divided into two types of people, and only one is living in the real world.
LRTV Interviews
CenturyLink: Building the Case for NFV

12|19|14   |   02:14   |   (0) comments


At the 2020 Vision Executive Summit, James Feger, VP, Network Strategy & Development at CenturyLink, talks about how the US operator is approaching virtual network functions from an operational and business case perspective.
LRTV Interviews
Liberty Global Sees Business Goldmine

12|18|14   |     |   (0) comments


Steen Sorensen, VP of business services for Liberty Global, explains where the giant international MSO sees growth potential.
LRTV Documentaries
EE: The Road to 5G

12|16|14   |   16:02   |   (1) comment


Andy Sutton, the principal network architect at UK mobile operator EE, explains how his company is using Wembley stadium as a wireless test bed and how that's helping EE to plan the evolution to 5G.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
Highlights of Huawei's NFV Open Cloud Forum 2014

12|16|14   |     |   (0) comments


Huawei hosted its inaugural NFV Open Cloud Forum during the SDN & OpenFlow World Congress 2014 in Düsseldorf, Germany. The Forum brought together technology thought leaders, senior executives and telecom professionals from global carriers, industry associations, as well as other partner companies in the ecosystem, to exchange views on and collectively explore how ...
LRTV Custom TV
Realizing Operators' Digital Vision

12|16|14   |   5:23   |   (0) comments


Leveraging technology is fundamental to digital transformation but understanding customers and serving them really well is at the heart of digital businesses. TM Forum lists the following as the strategic pillars of the digital business: business agility and rapid innovation, operational agility and effectiveness, IT and data centricity, plus customer centricity. ...
LRTV Documentaries
US Cellular Injects Analytics Into LTE

12|16|14   |   2:57   |   (1) comment


US Cellular's Mario Vela explains how the operator uses analytics for network planning and what comes next as the carrier looks to eke more value out of its metrics.
LRTV Interviews
How Cox Biz Plans to Keep Growing

12|15|14   |     |   (2) comments


Steve Rowley, SVP of Cox Business, details how the third-biggest US MSO intends to boost its revenues to $2 billion and beyond over the rest of the decade
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
Interview With Bill Zhang, Director of SoftCOM Product Management, Huawei

12|15|14   |   2:50   |   (0) comments


Bill Zhang elaborated on Huawei's open philosophy in NFV solution development and network architecture design at the SDN & OpenFlow World Congress 2014.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
Event Highlights: Huawei at SDN & OpenFlow World Congress 2014

12|15|14   |   3:43   |   (0) comments


Huawei joined the 2014 SDN & OpenFlow Congress as one of the key sponsors and contributors. At the event, Huawei reinforced the openness and flexibility of its network infrastructure strategies, and provided updates on its SDN and NVF innovations. Through participations at the exhibitions, forums and speeches, Huawei encouraged the industry to "think bigger and ...
LRTV Interviews
How Cable Biz Services Hit $10B Mark

12|12|14   |     |   (1) comment


Cable operators reached $10 billion in annual business services revenues by delving deeper into their vertical markets and expanding beyond the smallest firms.
LRTV Documentaries
Mediacom Aims to Test Connected Tractors

12|11|14   |   05:07   |   (3) comments


Cable business service provider is taking its services to the 'agribusiness' sector in partnership with farm equipment specialist John Deere and is getting involved in Gigabit Cities developments.
LRTV Interviews
TWC Business Looks Beyond $3B

12|10|14   |     |   (0) comments


TWC Business Services chief Phil Meeks explains how his unit has reached $3 billion in annual revenues and what its plans are for next year.
Upcoming Live Events
February 10, 2015, The Westin Peachtree Plaza, Atlanta, GA
March 17, 2015, The Cable Center, Denver, CO
April 14, 2015, The Westin Times Square, New York City, NY
May 6, 2015, McCormick Convention Center, Chicago, IL
May 13-14, 2015, The Westin Peachtree, Atlanta, GA
June 9-10, 2015, Chicago, IL
Hot Topics
Vodafone to Ride T-Mobile Back Into US
Dan Jones, Mobile Editor, 12/12/2014
1-Gig: Coming to a Small Town Near You
Jason Meyers, Senior Editor, Gigabit Cities/IoT, 12/17/2014
T-Mobile, BlackBerry Flirt With Reuniting
Sarah Reedy, Senior Editor, 12/17/2014
Gardner's Departure a Cautionary Tale
Carol Wilson, Editor-at-large, 12/12/2014
T-Mobile Lights Up 27 Wideband LTE Cities
Sarah Reedy, Senior Editor, 12/15/2014
Like Us on Facebook
Twitter Feed
Upcoming Webinars
Webinar Archive