& cplSiteName &

Accelerating Packet-Optical Convergence

Sterling Perrin
5/22/2014
50%
50%

In March, a group of leading network operators, led by Telefónica, published a white paper entitled "IP and Optical Convergence: Use Cases and Technical Requirements." The objective of this paper, as the authors write, was to outline the benefits, enablers, and challenges for IP and optical convergence, and the rationale for encouraging international collaboration to accelerate progress and development in this area.

In addition to Telefónica SA (NYSE: TEF), other contributing companies were: AXTEL Mexico; Bouygues Telecom; BT Group; China Unicom; Colt Telecom; Deutsche Telekom; KDDI; KT Corp. (Korea Telecom); Orange; and Telecom Italia.

The operator group assessed the value of a number of different IP and optical use cases. This blog focuses on multi-layer management, multi-layer planning, and multi-layer resilience, which garnered the most interest among the operator group -- and by a large margin.

The white paper looks at multi-layer resilience and focuses on an IP and optical layer resilience scheme that uses fast reroute (FRR) at the IP layer and GMPLS at the optical layer. The multi-layer network reduces operator capex by eliminating some of the requirements for 1+1 protection in the network. With traditional 1+1 protection, 50% of network capacity is reserved for backup in case a failure occurs, but a multi-layer control plane can be built to use 1:1 protection only when necessary.

While this paper does not provide multi-layer resilience savings statistics, DT research work published in 2012 demonstrated capex savings of 24-27% using a combination of IP layer and photonic layer restoration when compared to traditional network architectures implying IP layer restoration with full 1+1 protection. We have also seen equipment vendors cite even higher capex savings potential for this application.

Looking at multi-layer planning and management, a full integration of IP and optical layers can lead to better network manageability, but the complexity of full interaction (today, at least) requires a single vendor proprietary implementation. On the plus side, a proprietary integrated approach can speed up and simplify provisioning, fault management, and network planning. On the negative side, buying IP and optical layer equipment from a single vendor creates "dependencies that constrain network evolutions," according to the white paper. "Additionally, it brings a significant risk of increasing part of the OPEX, through the different upgrades and associated release qualifications since IP routers implies a high number of release updates," when compared with pure transport equipment releases.

The operators conclude that, in the case of proprietary, fully-integrated IP and optical management systems, the negatives outweigh the potential positives. The authors recommend that the industry begins working on open standards to achieve converged network management systems. This conclusion is very consistent with Heavy Reading 's findings from surveys and operator interviews during the past 18 months.

However, we continue to get pushback on this issue from various equipment vendors. A consistent counter argument we are hearing from suppliers is that, in the absence of full standards, operators will need to make proprietary decisions or lose out on the benefits of multi-layer integration completely. Granted, vendors have a strong incentive to preserve the status quo, but there is also a legitimate point being made here. With no clear cut path to standardization, how long will operators wait for multi-vendor interoperability to emerge?

— Sterling Perrin, Senior Analyst, Heavy Reading

(4)  | 
Comment  | 
Print  | 
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View        ADD A COMMENT
dwx
50%
50%
dwx,
User Rank: Light Sabre
5/23/2014 | 11:55:13 AM
Re: Restoration
I think 25-30% cost savings are completely realistic in a scenario where you are just account for long-haul fiber span failures.  
sterlingperrin
50%
50%
sterlingperrin,
User Rank: Lightning
5/23/2014 | 9:13:35 AM
Re: Restoration
dwx,

Good points. As this project was entirely operator driven, it doesn't seem like there is a big incentive to make the applications appear more beneficial than they really are. The DT work I cite in my blog puts the capex savings at 24-27%, which is relatively modest compared to the 50-60% capex savings that I've seen cited in several vendor studies looking at the same application.

I'm not sure, but it's possible that the DT work takes into consideration the Internet traffic factors you've mentioned in your post. 

Sterling

 
sterlingperrin
50%
50%
sterlingperrin,
User Rank: Lightning
5/23/2014 | 9:04:42 AM
Full White Paper Link
For anyone interested in downloading the full operator white paper (25 pages), it can be found here:

http://www.tid.es/sites/526e527928a32d6a7400007f/assets/532c7ce328a32d4d710006bd/White_paper_IP_Optical_Convergence__1_.pdf

 

Sterling
dwx
50%
50%
dwx,
User Rank: Light Sabre
5/22/2014 | 3:23:27 PM
Restoration
You have to really investigate the cost savings associated with photonic restoration.  The reality is no one uses 1+1 optical protection and builds L3 backup capacity for "Internet" IP traffic, which makes up the bulk of traffic today.   So right there you can toss out a large percentage of the cost savings because people like to tout both being implemented in networks.  The real cost savings is in not carrying as much backup L3 capacity for Internet traffic.  If you've seen slides from vendors and operators, the paradigm of "protecting" Internet traffic is going out the window and sustaining a 2-5s outage while a link goes down and comes back up is now acceptable.

By default none of this helps you in terms of equipment failure since it assumes the majority of failures are fiber cuts, which is accurate. If a L3 port goes down, you lose the capacity.  

The landscape right now is having an orchestration system/controller which can view and manage both packet and optical domains, and forcing vendors to implement open standards for programmability.  GMPLS has been going on for 15 years now, nothing has ever come from it in terms of marrying packet and optical.  

Vendors also aren't really putting packet interfaces in transport gear or OTN/DWDM interfaces in routers either.  The density and flexibility is pretty terrible for 100G in both directions.   IMHO the real opportunity is improving the interconnect between boxes with things like MacFlex so you aren't wasting either packet or optical resources.  So if I need 40G between two sites and 320G between two sites, I'm not wasting 100G and 400G to do so.  I'm using a flexible Ethernet MAC layer and then a flexible OTN container.   

  
More Blogs from Heavy Lifting Analyst Notes
The shift to application and network virtualization by operators and CSPs requires a new generation of multicore processors that are being introduced by many vendors.
In the wake of a damaging cyber attack in 2015, Philip Clayson was tasked with creating a cyber breach remediation plan for over 600 applications across TalkTalk's consumer and enterprise divisions and to deal with the operator's 'tech debt.'
It's still hard to say whether carrier SDN is really a success or a failure, but the needle is moving on SDN commercialization – albeit not as quickly as some might hope.
The most recent Thought Leadership Council (TLC) survey finds that although most communications service providers (CSPs) prefer to have a solid plan in place before moving on a new market trend, it's not looking to be the same for automation, as most CSPs surveyed say they are moving forward without solid plans.
Software-defined wide area network (SD-WAN) is the primary focus for cable in 2018, with fierce competition across the market.
Featured Video
From The Founder
The world of virtualization is struggling to wrench itself away from the claws of vendor lock-in, which runs counter to everything that NFV stands for.
Flash Poll
Upcoming Live Events
March 20-22, 2018, Denver Marriott Tech Center
March 22, 2018, Denver, Colorado | Denver Marriott Tech Center
March 28, 2018, Kansas City Convention Center
April 4, 2018, The Westin Dallas Downtown, Dallas
April 9, 2018, Las Vegas Convention Center
May 14-16, 2018, Austin Convention Center
May 14, 2018, Brazos Hall, Austin, Texas
September 24-26, 2018, Westin Westminster, Denver
October 9, 2018, The Westin Times Square, New York
October 23, 2018, Georgia World Congress Centre, Atlanta, GA
November 8, 2018, The Montcalm by Marble Arch, London
November 15, 2018, The Westin Times Square, New York
December 4-6, 2018, Lisbon, Portugal
All Upcoming Live Events
Hot Topics
21st Century Networking? Welcome to the Lock-In
Steve Saunders, Founder, Light Reading, 2/20/2018
How Long Before We Hit Peak MWC?
Iain Morris, News Editor, 2/23/2018
Stakes Run High for Tivo in Comcast Suit
Mari Silbey, Senior Editor, Cable/Video, 2/20/2018
Liberty Global: Not So Fast on D3.1
Alan Breznick, Cable/Video Practice Leader, Light Reading, 2/20/2018
AT&T Reveals Initial 5G Cities
Dan Jones, Mobile Editor, 2/21/2018
Animals with Phones
Live Digital Audio

A CSP's digital transformation involves so much more than technology. Crucial – and often most challenging – is the cultural transformation that goes along with it. As Sigma's Chief Technology Officer, Catherine Michel has extensive experience with technology as she leads the company's entire product portfolio and strategy. But she's also no stranger to merging technology and culture, having taken a company — Tribold — from inception to acquisition (by Sigma in 2013), and she continues to advise service providers on how to drive their own transformations. This impressive female leader and vocal advocate for other women in the industry will join Women in Comms for a live radio show to discuss all things digital transformation, including the cultural transformation that goes along with it.

Like Us on Facebook
Twitter Feed