& cplSiteName &
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View        ADD A COMMENT
Page 1 / 5   >   >>
opticalwatcher
opticalwatcher
12/4/2012 | 10:51:13 PM
re: Ceyba Goes Ultra-Long
There's a statement in this article indicating that traffic growth is occuring at 100% per year. Does anyone know or have comments on how growth is measured and whether this growth rate is realistic and accurate?
thx
PhotonGolf
PhotonGolf
12/4/2012 | 10:51:13 PM
re: Ceyba Goes Ultra-Long

"According to Fleury, most carriers are only using about 70 percent of their lit fiber capacity. But traffic is still growing at about 100 percent per year, which means that in another year, these carriers will need to turn up capacity on more of their fibers."
____________________

Hmmm. So when they need to light more fiber, won't they just buy more linecards from their existing vendors? I guess when they fill to capacity, they'll need new systems.

Anyone have a number on the average percentage utilization of the existing long haul platforms? Could indicate just when new systems like Ceyba could see market opportunity.

skeptic
skeptic
12/4/2012 | 10:51:12 PM
re: Ceyba Goes Ultra-Long
There's a statement in this article indicating that traffic growth is occuring at 100% per year. Does anyone know or have comments on how growth is measured and whether this growth rate is realistic and accurate?
----------------

Some traffic is still growing at extremely
agressive rates, but even if the rates are 100%
per year, its going to take a long time to
make a dent in the existing long-haul capacity.
There are lots of fibers and lots of wavelengths
that could go on each fiber. Its just hard to
imagine anyone even thinking about long-haul
buildout again for a long while.



mrcasual
mrcasual
12/4/2012 | 10:51:11 PM
re: Ceyba Goes Ultra-Long
You install a span of 100 fiber cable equipped with 32 lambda, 100 GHz
transmission gears and the appropriate amplifiers. You lit 10 lambdas
with 2.5 Gbps SONET. What percentage of your route is utilized?


Not very much. Do I get a passing grade?

The issue with increasing traffic wrt to long haul buildouts isn't as much the fiber in the ground as it is the terminating equipment.

Going forward I think gear that connects to the long haul part of the network will continue to sell as traffic grows. How much of that is new boxes, or upgrades to existing boxes is the really tough question for a lot of people right now.

If Ceyba (or others) are required to connect that new traffic then they have a chance. If the incumbants can address the expansion with relatively painless (from both and opex and capex POV) upgrades then they are doomed.

Note that it's not only a "transmission" problem. New routers, ATM switches (blasphemy!), etc. will all be required as traffic grows so there is hope assuming traffic continues to grow at a reasonably high rate, which all studies seem to conclude.
Milano
Milano
12/4/2012 | 10:51:11 PM
re: Ceyba Goes Ultra-Long
Utilization rate is meaningless and indeed mislead quite a few people last year. Try to answer the following question:

You install a span of 100 fiber cable equipped with 32 lambda, 100 GHz transmission gears and the appropriate amplifiers. You lit 10 lambdas with 2.5 Gbps SONET. What percentage of your route is utilized?

I bet you will have as many answers as there are ID's on LR...

M.
melao
melao
12/4/2012 | 10:51:10 PM
re: Ceyba Goes Ultra-Long
"The issue with increasing traffic wrt to long haul buildouts isn't as much the fiber in the ground as it is the terminating equipment.

Going forward I think gear that connects to the long haul part of the network will continue to sell as traffic grows. How much of that is new boxes, or upgrades to existing boxes is the really tough question for a lot of people right now.

If Ceyba (or others) are required to connect that new traffic then they have a chance. If the incumbants can address the expansion with relatively painless (from both and opex and capex POV) upgrades then they are doomed.

Note that it's not only a "transmission" problem. New routers, ATM switches (blasphemy!), etc. will all be required as traffic grows so there is hope assuming traffic continues to grow at a reasonably high rate, which all studies seem to conclude."

That-¦s the whole point. We have several DWDM long-haul systems with 32 or more wavelengths that has only 4 to 10 wavelengths occupied. Even if the traffic grows A LOT it-¦s just a matter of adding line cards.

I find very weird to bet on long-haul for a while.
And ultra-long-haul. Geez, how many carriers need ultra-long-haul nowadays ?

My guess is that in the beginning of 2004 we-¦ll see some substantial growth on long-haul... Just a guess.
opto
opto
12/4/2012 | 10:51:09 PM
re: Ceyba Goes Ultra-Long
Various sources are estimating traffic growth at 80% annual to 120%. Definitions of "traffic" are non-trivial, and no one agrees what constitutes the "proper" measure of network traffic, so even these numbers are really only rough numbers. The overall growth looks to be continuing at about the same pace over the last 5 years, minus the blip in 2K over dot.com mania.

I have some circumstantial evidence that typical fills of lambdas are on the order of 10% in LH DWDM. My numbers are from only one (big) carrier. Also, this would explain Huber saying Corvis does not need lamda conversion. With very low fill rates, it is simply not needed. He did not say it would "never" be needed, did he???

The issue of whether other dwdm systems vendors can make it is somewhat less clear, even though fill rates are low. I have heard of several vendors recently installed gear being replaced by another vendor's gear because the operations expenses associated with adding lambdas turned out to be too high. So that gear never got more than the initial lambdas lit and it was trashed (read second-hand market).

The fundamental issue facing carriers today is this: Their constituency (bosses) has changed their objective. In the 90's, it was "grow at all costs". Now, it is "find a way to be profitable". Wall Street has changed it's expectatations. Carriers are working to adapt. They must find lower cost ways to operate their networks. So now, Opex, or Total Cost of Ownership, is a big driver. It never was in the 90's. Thus, if a new vendor comes to market with a system that costs less to install, provision, maintain, monitor, troubleshoot, and expand, well then, they just might have a chance. Actually, they might have a really good chance. But they have to hope that the incumbents have designed themselves into corners, and that they cannot improve features and performance to the point that the new vendors do not have an Opex advantage.

So, no gross generalizations work here. Can Ceyba, et al, survive? They have a chance, if the gear proves in.
secretIdentity
secretIdentity
12/4/2012 | 10:51:05 PM
re: Ceyba Goes Ultra-Long
You're probably right with respect to expanding the number of wavelengths on a existing fiber - I think that might be tough to do with equipment from multiple vendors, and still yield a cost savings.

But what about expansion to light up the next fiber? I think using different vendors on different fibers in the same bundle would be OK.

And if a new vendor can save the carrier capex and opex with new equipment, how do you justify using the same old (more expensive) equipment?

I don't think Ceyba is providing the same old line cards at 70% off. They've probably got something significantly different to offer. If they don't, and the incumbent equipment vendors can just chop 70% off their prices with cost-reduction exercises, then why haven't they done this already?

However, I think the 100%/yr. growth rate sounds a little dated. If todays (or yesterdays) equipmemt was so expensive, how could anyone afford to overbuild by 100's of %? But I could be wrong on this one, too.
citpo
citpo
12/4/2012 | 10:51:03 PM
re: Ceyba Goes Ultra-Long
Innovance, Ceyba, Covis
Any comment about their strength and weakness?
Fhunton
Fhunton
12/4/2012 | 10:51:02 PM
re: Ceyba Goes Ultra-Long
Just reading some of the comments here, and it is exactly what i feel is wrong in the industry. There is lots of un-utilised lambdas. I work for a major telco vendor in Network Integration for DWDM.

We use our DWDM product in all the main operators networks, this machine obviously has massive capacity, carries over 80 lambdas (base model) etc etc.....the carriers are probably only using on average 8-10 lambdas!!!. The biggest one i've seen is 18 lambdas, and these are major carriers, and our company is launching it's next gen long haul ultra capacity product, when it's base product hasn't been fully utilised yet, I know and realise there are other factors by introducing new products etc.....but what i'm basically saying is just reiterating what has been said already in the this article, there are alot of unused lambdas that are going to take along time to fill......how much capacity do we need, i think it's alot less than is perceived, and is being touted around......utlilisation of existing network infrastructure is the next direction for telecoms, i personally think......
Page 1 / 5   >   >>


Featured Video
Upcoming Live Events
October 22, 2019, Los Angeles, CA
November 5, 2019, London, England
November 7, 2019, London, UK
November 14, 2019, Maritim Hotel, Berlin
December 3-5, 2019, Vienna, Austria
December 3, 2019, New York, New York
March 16-18, 2020, Embassy Suites, Denver, Colorado
May 18-20, 2020, Irving Convention Center, Dallas, TX
All Upcoming Live Events
Partner Perspectives - content from our sponsors
Sports Venues: Where 5G Brings a Truly Immersive Experience
By Peter Linder, 5G Evangelist, North America, Ericsson
Multiband Microwave Provides High Capacity & High Reliability for 5G Transport
By Don Frey, Principal Analyst, Transport & Routing, Ovum
All Partner Perspectives