& cplSiteName &
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View        ADD A COMMENT
<<   <   Page 7 / 12   >   >>
Tony Li
Tony Li
12/5/2012 | 1:50:04 AM
re: Siemens Sees Ethernet Everywhere
When someone start doing VoIP over the network, we will know whether all this QOS is good enough or not..
--------------

I do VoIP over my cable modem connection today. It works fine, without any QoS enabled.

Tony
SuperChargeAccess
SuperChargeAccess
12/5/2012 | 1:50:03 AM
re: Siemens Sees Ethernet Everywhere
I appreciate all of the feedback on the issue of ATM vs Ethernet. This is my summary of what I see the issues are:
1. Perception - it probably doesn't matter how cheap a solution is but how cheap you THINK a solution is. This has a lot to do with how things are marketed.

2. Existing ATM is more expensive because it can be. It is similiar to a T1 link vs a DSL link. DSL hardware is more expensive, has the ability to carry more data but costs less than T1. They charge more for T1 because they can.

3. There is a lot of politics and strong feelings that can cloud the issue.

4. The requirement that all of the interfaces between the CO and the CPE be open industry standards at all levels really drives up costs. The access equipment should compete as one system instead of several pieces.

If I were to design a access system from scratch, I would have Ethernet from a FTTH ONT, or Ethernet or DSL from a FTTC ONU, or Ethernet from a DSL modem. I would have an option in the CO for ATM or Ethernet interfaces to the data service provider and to the voice switch. I would switch ATM between the CO and the CPE.
But that ATM switching would not have SVC's, it would only handle UBR, CBR, and VBRrt traffic. It's main purpose would be transportation and aggregation of traffic with guaranteed miniscule delay of voice. It would just utilize the pieces of ATM that are needed and that were designed for this application. And I believe that it will be cheaper (slightly) than switching Ethernet.

P.S.
Marconi (Fore) has a OC192 ATM interface.

technonerd
technonerd
12/5/2012 | 1:50:01 AM
re: Siemens Sees Ethernet Everywhere
I don't know enough about ATM vs. Ethernet to render an opinion on the relative technical merits, but I do think I have enough background and experience to be justified in believing that this particular battle is over and done with at the access level. My impression, and that's all it is, is that ATM had two problems, one being its cost and the other being that it was never really designed to scale down to the DS-0 or even the DS-1 level and therefore was really only appropriate for the core and maybe the feeder segments.

I'd be interested in some input on that.
stephenpcooke
stephenpcooke
12/5/2012 | 1:50:00 AM
re: Siemens Sees Ethernet Everywhere
Good Summary SuperChargeAccess!

What I might suggest are a couple of things concerning design of a next generation access system:

- Design a CPE 'shelf' that has cards in it that mount to the customer's wall near their electrical panel. Make it the same width as the space between the framing studs. The shelf would have a backplane that had a processor interface, DC power distribution, a matrix of slot interconnections, and an interface for an expansion shelf.
- Publish the specs of this new CPE shelf to alarm companies, meter-making companies (for remote reading of power and water meters), cable companies, home-LAN companies, cordless phone companies, etc.
- On the telecom side provide an initial offering with simple wire-wrap posts on a card that plugs into the frame. Provide additional offerings which include DSL modems, extensions, Ethernet hubs & switches, etc. The interesting point about this is that you could then remove the need for point-to-point (or star) configurations for POTS and replace them with G.SHDSL-based collector rings. The bandwidth between houses would be huge with very little restriction due to distance (because they would all be comparatively short). This would allow huge changes to the current state of telecom and would provide carriers with the capability of providing SLAs to residential customers (ie: you can have as many phone lines as you want with guaranteed n x 64k bandwidth and peak rates on IP traffic, etc.).
- The base configuration would need a text-based pager for the meter-reading, emergency backup, and potentially alarm surveillance in the case of wire cuts to the house.
- use ATM in the ring to guarantee the phone bandwidth. ATM is much better in this situation than Ethernet and would be easier to sell to consumers than an IP-based solution. It is also designed to provide peak-rate monitoring, etc. and fits well into telecom carrier billing systems.
- on these potential volumes ATM equipment would fall drastically in price.
- regarding who pays for the installation, the consumer would eventually pay for it of course, but the telecom and cable providers would split the cost with the utilities that were looking to automate their meter reading. Do it on a basis of anyone who wants it can have it installed as well as being required for all moves. All sorts of business cases present themselves. With the capability of adding an extension shelf you could even sell these through Radio Shack or Future Shop for other capabilities.
- Cable companies would design cable modems and set-top boxes that would be cards in the shelf for ordering pay per view, etc. They could even put multiple ports and tuners on the cards that would be enabled by their customer support desk when the customer wanted more than one TV.

Just some thoughts, have fun with it.

Steve.
opticalwatcher
opticalwatcher
12/5/2012 | 1:49:59 AM
re: Siemens Sees Ethernet Everywhere
Are you suggesting a chassis at every customer site? Am I understanding this correctly? Who's would pay for this?
Abby
Abby
12/5/2012 | 1:49:58 AM
re: Siemens Sees Ethernet Everywhere
>>Form the Andrew Odlyzko's own paper, even the backbone of the Internet are running at 10 to 15% utilization?? Why?? Why won't they run at higher utilization?? That sound a lousy way to run business that have trunk that run at such a low utilization unless there is a reason..
--------------------------

As explained to me by a close friend who is a capacity planner for a Tier One network, the average utilization in the core is 8% to 12%, and never will get much higher. The reason for the low utilization has to do with topology of the network and 100% network uptime. For instance, an efficient network design can have a topology where the failure of one trunk in the core results in the convergence of multiple trunks on an alternate route.
stephenpcooke
stephenpcooke
12/5/2012 | 1:49:58 AM
re: Siemens Sees Ethernet Everywhere
Tera, the consumer eventually pays for everything. The initial costs could be split between the utilities and communications providers who would then bill the consumer for it. Other options would be that it was sold in Radio Shack or Future Shop with rebate certificates from the cable and telecom providers as well as the local power and water utilities. All sorts of options are there if you think about it. Once the platform was installed, the cards, and therefore potential services, would be much easier to deal with.

Imagine the savings of the Motorola's, V-Tech's, etc. of the world not having to build all the boxes around their cable modems or cordless phones. Consider the reduced number of transformer-based power cables around your house, etc.
arch_1
arch_1
12/5/2012 | 1:49:57 AM
re: Siemens Sees Ethernet Everywhere
>>Form the Andrew Odlyzko's own paper, even the backbone of the Internet are running at 10 to 15% utilization?? Why?? Why won't they run at higher utilization?? That sound a lousy way to run business that have trunk that run at such a low utilization unless there is a reason..

This paper refers to monthly utilization, not peak utilization. Monthly utilization is irrelevant to QoS, Only peak utilization matters.

To a first approximation, QoS is affected by available absolute excess bandwidth, not available excess percentage bandwidth. An OC-192 that peaks at 95% has 500Mbps excess bandwidth. A T1 that peaks at 50% has 768Kpbs excess bandwidth. The OC-192 introduces less jitter than the T1. THis is why QoS matters in the last mile but not in the core.
sgan201
sgan201
12/5/2012 | 1:49:53 AM
re: Siemens Sees Ethernet Everywhere
Hi Tony,
Are you sure that your cable modem is not running over a DOCSIS 1.1 /DOCSIS 2.0 system?? DOCSIS 1.1/DOCSIS 2.0 has QOS mechanism built-in.. If shared access is good enough why cable modem folks evolved DOCSIS 1.0 into 1.1/2.0 that has QOS?? Is it possible that they had learned something..

"The truth is out there!!"

Dreamer
sgan201
sgan201
12/5/2012 | 1:49:49 AM
re: Siemens Sees Ethernet Everywhere
Hi stephenpccoke,
In a collector ring where all traffic are aggregated into a hub, there is no difference in bandwidth efficiency between UPSR and BLSR. BLSR advantage comes in only when your traffic pattern is distributed.

Dreamer
<<   <   Page 7 / 12   >   >>


Featured Video
Upcoming Live Events
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