x
Optical/IP

Next-Gen Sonet Growing, Report Says

Despite ongoing budget cuts, carriers will keep spending to improve the capabilities of their metro Sonet networks, according to a recent report from IDC.

The firm says that by 2006, carriers will nearly double what they're spending today in order to replace older, "legacy" Sonet (Synchronous Optical NETwork) and SDH (Synchronous Digital Hierarchy) ADMs with newer equipment that supports both voice and data transport. The gear combines time-division multiplexing (TDM) with newer transport methods like Ethernet.

NOTE: IDC calls the devices being used to replace ADMs multiservice provisioning platforms (MSPPs), although that term has come to mean different things to different industry sources. For instance, the term "multiservice" has been used to describe new and improved Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) gear, and that's not what IDC's including.

"We're not talking about ATM-based gear, but instead equipment that builds on traditional Sonet/SDH ADMs, that incorporates other forms of transport along with that functionality," says Sterling Perrin, senior research analyst at IDC.

Examples, he says, include: Perrin says the top three worldwide suppliers in 2001 were Alcatel, with 31 percent of a $1.1 billion market, followed by Nortel, with 30 percent, and Cisco with 26 percent. Cisco also led the North American market in 2001 with a 56 percent share.

Perrin acknowledges that other taxonomies group some of this gear in the "next-gen Sonet" space (see Next-Gen Sonet ). Devices classed that way also are designed to replace existing Sonet/SDH ADMs with gear that's denser, cheaper, and easier to manage and configure.

The key point to keep in mind, Perrin says, is that what he calls MSPPs provide both packet-based transport like Ethernet and circuit-based TDM support in a unit that works as a Sonet ADM. "Sheltering MSPPs from the downturn is their value proposition as an evolutionary technology step in the gradual carrier migration from circuit to packet," he writes in an executive summary of the report.

"Other types of products, including DWDM and optical Ethernet, will take a piece of revenue, without question, but we see MSPPs growing," says Sterling Perrin, senior research analyst at IDC. The segment, he writes in his summary, "represents the largest metro optical revenue opportunity of the next five years."

— Mary Jander, Senior Editor, Light Reading
www.lightreading.com
Page 1 / 3   >   >>
BobbyMax 12/4/2012 | 9:37:24 PM
re: Next-Gen Sonet Growing, Report Says The CAPEX has been going down very drastically. Carriers are very happy with SONET, but they want next generation of network elements to be tightly integrated in order to cut down the cost.

Most of the next generation next generation network elements have the combined functionnality of SONET node, ADM, DWDM, Cross Connect, Ethernet and TDM.

The next generation Sonet node should be able to operate in conjuction with the older versions of Sonet nodes. This would ensure easy transitioning.

I think that Nortel and Alcatel have the best quality next generation Sonet nodes.

willywilson 12/4/2012 | 9:37:13 PM
re: Next-Gen Sonet Growing, Report Says We had all these so-called gigabit ethernet carriers spewing their VC shyster bubble market crap until they went bankrupt, at which point it emerges that they weren't using gigabit ethernet to begin with but rather ethernet over SONET.

So, what's the response from the ever-eager contract research industry? Slap another new label on the same old stuff. Call it NG SONET, ignore all the old lies ("down the memory hole") and get ready to tout the next miracle cure.

Ain't California great?!
Metropolitian 12/4/2012 | 9:37:13 PM
re: Next-Gen Sonet Growing, Report Says Given the current economic climate, spending on new CAPEX (New Generation SONET) will be very limited for the next couple of years. Service Providers are primarily concerned with squeezing more revenue out of existing equipment and minimizing operational costs (i.e. OPEX)

Most Generation equipment like Nortel's Viking line does not really offer a quantum leap in terms of improving OPEX concerns. All it really offers is a better capacity density per floorspace.

If I were a service provider, I would not rip out existing equipment in order to squeeze some extra capacity on the same footprint with the Viking line.

It would be a nice box if service providers were laying out new networks, but this is not the case. Given the implosion in the industry with all the chapter 7 & 11 filings, it is cheaper to buy the assets and networks of bankrupt companies for pennies on the dollar rather than but new equipment and build new networks.



willywilson 12/4/2012 | 9:37:12 PM
re: Next-Gen Sonet Growing, Report Says The CAPEX has been going down very drastically. Carriers are very happy with SONET, but they want next generation of network elements to be tightly integrated in order to cut down the cost.

Most of the next generation next generation network elements have the combined functionnality of SONET node, ADM, DWDM, Cross Connect, Ethernet and TDM.

--------

Bobby, I'm surprised at you for having fallen for this "next-gen" crapola. Come on, chips get faster every two years and software development marches on. Do we call the new cars "next gen automobiles?" Sheesh, it's just SONET. Improved, for sure. But this "next-gen" stuff is marketing hype out of the bubble. Tsk, tsk!
marionetteworks 12/4/2012 | 9:37:10 PM
re: Next-Gen Sonet Growing, Report Says We had all these so-called gigabit ethernet carriers spewing their VC shyster bubble market crap until they went bankrupt, at which point it emerges that they weren't using gigabit ethernet to begin with but rather ethernet over SONET.


As long as they're offering GigE ports to their customers that's all that matters and it's not hype. Ethernet is cheaper for the customer. This is opposed to telcos, who've been offering expensive T1's, DS-3 and OC-3+...

willywilson 12/4/2012 | 9:37:04 PM
re: Next-Gen Sonet Growing, Report Says As long as they're offering GigE ports to their customers that's all that matters and it's not hype. Ethernet is cheaper for the customer. This is opposed to telcos, who've been offering expensive T1's, DS-3 and OC-3+...

---------

DS-1, DS-3 and OC-3 are data rates. Ethernet is a Layer 2/3 transmission protocol. Apples & oranges. Never confuse a technology with a service, and never confuse either with the pricing of a service.
MrLight 12/4/2012 | 9:37:02 PM
re: Next-Gen Sonet Growing, Report Says Citing these products as Next generation SONET:

Alcatel SA OMSN
Ciena MetroDirector K2 Cisco ONS 15454
Fujitsu 4000
Lightscape Networks Ltd. XDM
Nortel OPTera Metro 3500

Bades the question what is Next Generation SONET.

Is it?

1.Higher tributary/client card port density [bits/cubic inch(cm)]?
2.10Gbps (OC192/OC192c)support?
3.POS RFC2615(HDLC framed Packet over SONET) which supersedes IP over ATM over SONET?
4.Integrated DWDM [OADM]optical networking?
5.Multi-layer [Notice:I didn't say Multi-service]layer 1 and 2 interfaces i.e. Ethernet (layer 2 10BASET/100BASET,100BASEFX,1000BASESX/LX) and traditional layer 1 TDM from DS1/E1 to OC-192/STM-64?
6.M13 capable (TRANSMUX) DS3 tributary cards?
7.Integrated STS-1/VC-3,STS-3c/VC-4,STS-12/VC-4-4c switching matrix?
8.Integrated VT1.5/VC-11/VC-12 switching matrix?
9.RPR 802.17 Collector Ring interfaces like Nortel's InterWAN and Cisco's DPT? Channelized or unchannelized is still an issue though?
10.802.1Q virtual LAN (VLAN support, with IEEE 802.1P for High priority traffic and IEEE 802.3x for flow control?
11.Integrated edge data switching [mind you most of these boxes are just data aware with a limited switching of MAC frames]?

Except for 2 and 8 which require a backplane change most existing SONET boxes can be made to support the rest above with circuit card changes. It does not require a new platform. So for Next generation SONET to really move carriers to a new box platform it has to do more than what can be achieved with a circuit card swap-out.

The other question in all this is where is the
Ethernet over Sonet using Virtual Concatenation
with GFP ( see www.commsdesign.com/design_cor... for a recent article from Cypress Semi. on virtual concatenation) in the above boxes.

It isn't there. Meaning these "Next Generation Boxes" will need to be upgraded and their "Integrated STS-1/VC-3,STS-3c/VC-4,STS-12/VC-4-4c and/or integrated VT1.5/VC-11/VC-12 switching matrices replaced to get the benefits of Virtual Concatenation.

It would be interesting to understand how the carrier's planning group factors that into their 2002 and 2003 Next-generation SONET equipment spend? Normally you would expect them to probably buy only what they need until virtual concatentaion products come out, wouldn't you?

Also these Next Generation boxes really don't have integrated optical switching [it isn't what the XDM is advertising] or re-configurable DWDM OADM, or integrated optical power monitoring/control or protocol independence or stacked ring termination or mesh connectivity protection or load-shared protection or extra-traffic protection etc.

MrLight :)
sigint 12/4/2012 | 9:36:57 PM
re: Next-Gen Sonet Growing, Report Says MrLight:
sigint 12/4/2012 | 9:36:56 PM
re: Next-Gen Sonet Growing, Report Says MrLight:
Except for 2 and 8 which require a backplane change most existing SONET boxes can be made to support the rest above with circuit card changes. It does not require a new platform. So for Next generation SONET to really move carriers to a new box platform it has to do more than what can be achieved with a circuit card swap-out.

__________________________________________________
Oops ! Sorry for the previous "blank" post.


Is the effort that goes into "adapting" an existing SONET box really worth it ? Only the back-plane and the chassis can be salvaged, line cards and switch/router/cross-connect cards need replacement.

Consider:

1. Stability issues remain - the new circuit cards classify is "untried and untested". Old back-panel doesn't guarantee stability

2. Older systems aren't probably designed to work at today's line rates. This brings in system design complications. Ties the hands of HW and SW designers.

3. The system would need to go through the entire compliance process all over again.

Isn't it simpler to redesign the entire system ?
MrLight 12/4/2012 | 9:36:52 PM
re: Next-Gen Sonet Growing, Report Says Yes it is technically simpler to redesign the entire system assuming you have the resources and the funding. However commercially it is harder since now you have to re-qualify the whole product internally - with respect to characterization and verification and externally - with respect to regulatory (EMC,Safety,ESD etc) and commercial (NEBS, OSMINE etc) requirements.

Also you have to deal with potential brand confusion amongst your customers, and having your new product canabilzing your legacy product. In this case the legacy is first generation SONET/SDH with limited data specialization and limited DWDM awareness.

I find therefore it is much better to design a new product from scratch only if it can give you a quantum jump in density, performance, reachability, or connectivity. This is based on my direct experience in architecting and designing many successful voice/data/video switch and transport network products for xxxxxx and xxxxxxxx.

A large enough of a jump that one - you can charge a premium over your very profitable legacy product your new product will canabalize and two - you can capture new markets or customers with the new product because of new features and functionality.

Now if your competitor comes out with a new product while you are still contemplating whether to steroidize your legacy product or build a new product, well then you are in trouble.

In the past the incumbent vendors, lets call them INEP (Incumbent Network Element Product companies for short, would have just bought the competitor with freshly minted shares. If no other competitor came along with a simliar offering with a business quarter the incumbent vendor had the option of shelving the bought product and continuing with selling their legacy product, or productizing the bought company's product and winding down the legacy product.

Unfortunately this is no longer that easily done with most INEP company's stocks at a all time low.

So now the INEPs have be on top of things, because if they are't, then watch out since somebody is going to each their lunch at some point.

Right now the INEPs have the reprieve of "we don't buy from startups" mantra from their big customers, but once one of those customers steps out of the herd to avoid the "buffalo jump" , that will change. Also a lot of the startups have products that do not provide a "quantum leap" in density, performance, reachability, or connectivity which has given the INEPS another reprieve, but that will change also by 2005/2006.

MrLight, :) shedding some light on the subject
Page 1 / 3   >   >>
HOME
Sign In
SEARCH
CLOSE
MORE
CLOSE