<<   <   Page 3 / 3
spegru 12/5/2012 | 3:36:12 AM
re: Poll: Opex Gives PBT an Edge Perhaps the question for this poll should have been "Whole Life cost give PBT An Edge".
Isn't capital cost important too?

One thing that everyone seems to say is that MPLS is expensive!

cue cat amongst pigeons........

sigint 12/5/2012 | 3:36:12 AM
re: Poll: Opex Gives PBT an Edge Is it possible to obtain a copy of the proposal (or standard)? Is it available in the public domain yet?
yarn 12/5/2012 | 3:36:11 AM
re: Poll: Opex Gives PBT an Edge Hello Davallan,

Clearly at least 26% of the votes were not from NT so I'm not blaming you for the results:) I do agree that at a high level you can draw some conceptual parallels between traditional transport technologies such as SONET/SDH and an Ethernet switch based cross-connect model. However there are significant differences in terms of what management support these technologies offer today. SDH/SONET was designed to be manageable from the start, it has very rich and mature OAM&P capabilities and management information models (CMIP based). Ethernet has traditionally been weak in this area but by carrying it in MPLS tunnels it got more manageable.

So there are standardization activities to improve Ethernet OAM which is great. But I would assume that the benefits of these would equally apply for native Ethernet, PBT and Ethernet over MPLS is it not?
davallan 12/5/2012 | 3:36:11 AM
re: Poll: Opex Gives PBT an Edge There is a public section of IEEE where PBT proposed work can be found.


davallan 12/5/2012 | 3:36:10 AM
re: Poll: Opex Gives PBT an Edge Hi Yarn:

I agree Ethernet traditionally has been weak, and either the layer below or above proxied for it. That has changed IMO and a lot of thought has gone into the OAM, particularly the multipoint aspects. The standardization of Ethernet OAM for dataplane, and management plane is well along (e.g. 802.1AB, .1ag and Y.1731).

I understand the value of it for Ethernet, and for PBT. PBT does not change the transfer function of the bridge (just how the tables are populated) so the OAM simply "works".

For Ethernet over MPLS the explciit utility in that context is less clear, as it would simply be a mechanism to tell you when things were messed up and MPLS didn't know it (assuming you beleive such things can happen)...and unless you were running it yourself over the PWs from the PEs (which means there is a bit of OAM "bloat", CFM/VCCV/MPLSOAM), it would be the CEs who were figuring this out...

SolitonWave 12/5/2012 | 3:36:09 AM
re: Poll: Opex Gives PBT an Edge Also being pushed at ITU-T SG15 and MEF.
gigeguy 12/5/2012 | 3:36:07 AM
re: Poll: Opex Gives PBT an Edge You should update the original article with a new headline, "MPLS trounces PBT in poll by more than 3 to 1"!!!!!. Thanks in advance for some truth in journalism.
SolitonWave 12/5/2012 | 3:36:03 AM
re: Poll: Opex Gives PBT an Edge :-) ... and forward the results to BT...
<<   <   Page 3 / 3
Sign In