Market Leader Programs
5G Transport - A 2023 Heavy Reading Survey 2023 Open RAN Operator Survey Coherent Optics at 100G, 400G, and Beyond Open RAN Platforms and Architectures Operator Survey Cloud Native 5G Core Operator Survey Bridging the Digital Divide 5G Network Slicing Operator Survey Open, Automated & Programmable Transport The Journey to Cloud Native
When Juniper said things like this, I believed
them....and after the fact it turned out that
their "from-scratch" code turned out to be
based on gated.
I want to believe procket, but what they are
talking about sure sounds like it was based on
The other rather obvious thing to mention is
that "modularity" in things like OSPF and ISIS
and BGP is generally useless. You can put it
into a different process, but if any one of them
goes down, the whole ship still sinks. If OSPF
goes down, the BGP next-hops become unreachable.
if BGP goes down, most of the connectivity in
the system is lost.
And as far as in-service upgrade, what are they
really offering? Just because OSPF is a seperate
process doesn't indicate anything about how
in-service upgrades are to be done and based
on past comments, they don't seem to be doing
anything technically different than cisco/juniper
in how they plan to do in-service upgrades.
No, we did not use Zebra. Yes, it is all from scratch.
Yes, BGP is dependent on OSPF, but other cases that are not dependencies are more interesting. For example if PIM goes down, unicast is not affected.
For in service upgrades, what we're making available today is the ability to install a replacement module for one of IS-IS, BGP, OSPF or PIM and then restart that particular process. Today this would be typically used to phase in patches. Yes, this would cause a service interruption, but all other processes would still be alive.
As far as I understand, the carriers won't qualify
hardware vendors that use Gate D or BSD, or
any other routing code that is "off-the-shelf".
This isn't some unique Procket feature, this is a
requirement set forth by the customers. Any
equipment vendor worth his weight needs to do the
same thing if they want to sell product.
In these times of tight finances most SP's will really scrutinize any expensive recommendation to introduce a new hardware and software platform into a sizable network. My guess is that Procket will get most of their market share from 1.)SP's that are not happy with Cisco and didn't view Juniper as a better solution 2.)SP's that want a new second provider (ala NTT/Verio) 3.)New deployments where the SP's can afford to risk a new vendor introduction. The question is how much will that market share and revenue be and is it enough.
I do seriously doubt that this is compelling enough to motivate any semi-satisified Cisco or Juniper customer to jump on the Procket bandwagon. I suspect that the 65% lower cost claim will be difficult to prove and therefore not make much of a difference in the long run. IMO, the only thing that will get SP's attention in a big way is to demonstrate dramatically improved uptime versus the incumbents. This will take time to prove out.
The real interesting point to me is where they go with licensing the code to other partners. Cisco tried this in the distant past and quickly abandoned it and Juniper has never shown any interest in it. If the the portable Procket code delivers good IP functionality and reliability, with the right partners it could become more of a threat to Cisco than Huawei.
It is also apparent that the Procket marketing team was more successful in getting the word out. A big LR article vs. only a mention in the news briefs is certainly a win for Procket.
I wish them both luck but can't see how either is going to make money in this terrible market.
BTW The Caspian news bulletin has a really insensitive comment from the CEO. He states how the product is such a huge accomplishment for the team, etc. He neglects to mention that he's just laid off 40% of them now that the job is complete. I'm sure the "displaced team members" would rather have been less successful and still have their jobs.
Caspian isn't announcing much of anything that
they have not announced before. I dont see
any detail about customers or trials.
Their flow-based adaptive router stuff is still,
IMO flawed and open to DOS attacks and
manipulation. Distributed computing is really
difficult to get right and the benefits are not
really clear. The routing table has to live
somewhere (one place) and no matter how you
distribute the rest, if the routing table is
lost, everything is gone.
I remember Caspian promising revenue and
customers "soon" at least a year ago. I remember
an article about them preparing for an IPO
long (maybe a year) before that. All
we got today (as far as I can see) is old
presentations re-done and new graphics on