x
Optical/IP

Xebeo to Build a Service-Aware Switch

Stealthy startup Xebeo Communications Inc. is about to become a little less stealthy. The company has signed an agreement with IBM Corp. (NYSE: IBM), Light Reading has learned, through which IBM will manufacture custom application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs) for Xebeo. Xebeo (pronounced: za-BAY-o) is building a packet-switching and service-provisioning box for carriers using Ethernet as a replacement for ATM, Sonet, and Frame Relay.

A deal with IBM, one of the premiere developers of ASICs, is a good place to start. Rather than just moving bits, Xebeo's box falls under the category of switches that have substantial packet processing capabilities and can perform a “deep read” of packets as they enter the switch. The ASICs and other electronics in such switches classify, queue, shape, and police the flow of data in order to allow carriers to charge for IP services (see The Service-Aware Switch).

Xebeo's box sits where long-haul fibers meet metropolitan area networks and will aggregate as many as 3,200 gigabit Ethernet connections, or the Sonet equivalent thereof. Not many more details are known about Xebeo's technology, but it sounds as though it would compete with equipment made by Cisco Systems Inc. (Nasdaq: CSCO), Juniper Networks Inc. (Nasdaq: JNPR), Foundry Networks Inc. (Nasdaq: FDRY), Extreme Networks Inc. (Nasdaq: EXTR), and Nortel Networks Corp. (NYSE/Toronto: NT).

Six former Bell Labs engineers -- Rohit Dube, Kerry Fendick, Kanwar Jit Singh, Lampros Kalampoukas, Donpaul C. Stephens, and Bernhard Suter -- founded the company in the spring of 2000. Its board members include Crescendo Ventures' Jeff Hinck and Morgenthaler Ventures' Greg Blonder.

Though it recently added Ewald Anderl as its software director and Barbara Coulter as its operations boss, Xebeo's executive staff is far from complete (see Ewald Anderl Joins Xebeo and Xebeo Names Operations VP). Donpaul Stephens is currently acting as the company's CEO, but Xebeo is looking for someone else to take the job permanently.

Xebeo has raised $17.65 million to date from four investors: Crescendo, Morgenthaler, Windward Ventures, and Millennium Ventures. (Michael Centrella runs Millennium Ventures. His consultancy, Centrella Technology Partners, cites Xebeo as one of its clients.)

- Phil Harvey, Senior Editor, Light Reading
http://www.lightreading.com
msceller 12/4/2012 | 8:00:23 PM
re: Xebeo to Build a Service-Aware Switch I was wondering if anyone could tell me how NEBS standards for power consumption and heat output differ for a POP, a central office, and an enterprise environment.

Or, could anyone point me to a place that breaks out the requirements (Watts per Rack) behind the NEBS standards... such as what is defined by the SR-3580, or the GR-1089-Core.....
skeptic 12/4/2012 | 7:59:58 PM
re: Xebeo to Build a Service-Aware Switch I was wondering if anyone could tell me how NEBS standards for power consumption and heat output differ for a POP, a central office, and an enterprise environment.
------------------------------

I can't tell you what the standards say, but
there is lots of willingness to bend the rules
in all three cases if you have equipment that
the customer wants bad enough.

Its always better to meet the NEBS numbers for
power and heat, but there is enough flexability
these days that its something thats best talked
about with customers.

There are some customers who will trade off
power/heat for density regardless of NEBS.


BrettNemeroff 12/4/2012 | 7:59:57 PM
re: Xebeo to Build a Service-Aware Switch I believe that the NEBS standard for power consumption is about 5000 Watts per bay.

Understand tho, that number makes certain assumptions regarding aisle widths and circulation.

In general NEBS is just a guideline. No one has to follow NEBS. However, meeting or exceeding NEBS requirements will ensure reliability, safty, and some amounts of interoperability and generally reflect the quality of the engineering of the system. I have seen some very, very large systems in the optical domain that arn't anywhere close to meeting NEBS (one particular device is 4 feet deep and consumes 32 kilowatts in the space of 6 bays.. yes 32,000 watts!!!!) However, this piece of equipment is a real product you might want in your network. Failure to meet NEBS should not be a single determination to weather you want a product.

On the other hand. Many, many ILECs will have as a requirement that a product not only meet NEBS requirements, but also be certified by a third party lab (such as MET labs) and those test results must be REVIEWED by the ILEC before you will be allowed to collocate with that device. I call this process "NEBS Plus" :)

One other thing that I think is worth mentioning is that if ANY RBOC has allowed collocation of a given device or has installed a given device in ANY of their locations, that device (by FCC mandate) is acceptable for collocation in ALL RBOC TERRITORIES. Good info to know.

Hope that helps.
msceller 12/4/2012 | 7:59:25 PM
re: Xebeo to Build a Service-Aware Switch Thanks for the help so far.....

Still a bit confuse though!

[One other thing that I think is worth mentioning is that if ANY RBOC has allowed collocation of a given device or has installed a given device in ANY of their locations, that device (by FCC mandate) is acceptable for collocation in ALL RBOC TERRITORIES. Good info to know.]

I'm not quite clear on the above statement.
Does that mean that if I install the 32kW box in a NYC POP, the FCC mamdates that my POP in Omaha, NE has to have the infrastructure (power/cooling/footprint) that would allow the installation of the 32kW box there even if it would never be needed?

Also,

If a box does not have to meet the NEBS standard, what are the gates for power and heat dissapation?
Who makes the decision? Is it on a provider by provider basis? What is the motivation to comply with NEBS?

Thanks....

HOME
Sign In
SEARCH
CLOSE
MORE
CLOSE