Page 1 / 3   >   >>
photon2 12/5/2012 | 3:01:34 PM
re: Vendors Clash Over PBT Having been in Geneva for all the presentations this article is wildly overstating what occured.
digits 12/5/2012 | 3:01:33 PM
re: Vendors Clash Over PBT Untrue?

Did you see the panel debate end of day one when Dave Allan from Nortel fought a rearguard action against the JNPR and CSCO onslaught?

Or the Nokia Siemens presentation that laid into the power consumption and complexity of a router compared with an Ethernet switch?

Or the Nortel presentation or the...

Then there were the ad hoc debates on the compact exhibition floor, many of which were about PBT's pros and cons, as were many of the conversations in the EANTC interop test area.

PBT wasn't the ONLY topic of conversation at that event, and it was the focus of a minority of the presentations -- this was a Carrier Ethernet event that covered a broad range of topics -- but it was without doubt the dominant topic and there are clearly strong feelings on both sides of the divide, and those feelings were vented.

CoreRouterBuilder 12/5/2012 | 3:01:29 PM
re: Vendors Clash Over PBT How much is $$$ cheaper to run PBT vs. MPLS over Ethernet?

There are many ways to get there to launch Ethernet type services.
Is PBT the most optimum for Ethernet provisioning so it will drive the cost down? How?

Do you have real numbers?
fsubob 12/5/2012 | 3:01:28 PM
re: Vendors Clash Over PBT Of course there are real cost benefits, why would you think BT (and others) would even think of deploying PBT. Read any PBT whitepaper and youG«÷ll find management and technology benefits as well.
CoreRouterBuilder 12/5/2012 | 3:01:27 PM
re: Vendors Clash Over PBT BT is a big name. If BT (or a few people in BT) did not start this I am not sure how far it would have gone

Please copy a web link here where it would show a real cost benefits of PBT for a service provider to drive cost down.

So far BT is using MPLS from what I hear; do you know otherwise?

It could be a good marketing strategy for BT to get attention in the industry.

What do you think?
ROBERT-DELANGE 12/5/2012 | 3:01:26 PM
re: Vendors Clash Over PBT Looking this over closely, it seems PBT just shifts the cost from CapEx to OpEx with a loss of functionality, flexibility and security. I would expect CapEx and OpEx on MPLS-based networks decline as a natural part of its evolution, while CapEx of PBB increases as needed functionality and control is added - first T-MPLS then GMPLS. What am I missing?
t.bogataj 12/5/2012 | 3:01:26 PM
re: Vendors Clash Over PBT Comparing PBB and PBT, there can be no real grounded difference in price: they both require the same HW, switching fabric, etc.


The cost of PBT transport equipment may remain comparable to PBB, but there are hidden costs. The very thing that is willingly overlooked by PBT prophets is the cost of PBT's control/management plane, which has an enormous impact on Capex for PBT deployment. So far, GMPLS is the main candidate for PBT's control plane. Does it come cheap?
CoreRouterBuilder 12/5/2012 | 3:01:24 PM
re: Vendors Clash Over PBT Please show me your calculation for 30%. I'd like to see it. Is it a public domain info or your own estimate?

Could you put a URL here for a doc describing your 30% cost estimate?
t.bogataj 12/5/2012 | 3:01:24 PM
re: Vendors Clash Over PBT macster: "Why the PBB (802.1ah) comparison with PBT (802.1aq)? Both PBB and PBT will be able to co-exist on the same kit - we can set the VLAN ranges for PBT."

Exactly! So you agree that hardware/fabric for both PBB and PBT is practically the same. Hence, no difference in price. Do you need any control-plane equipment for PBB? None. Do you need a costly control-plane equipment for PBT? -Yesss. Sum that up.

tata, T.
macster 12/5/2012 | 3:01:24 PM
re: Vendors Clash Over PBT Firstly, you really need to understand what PBT and T-MPLS are? When do we use PBT? When is T-MPLS the better option?

The main point is composition: services composition, network composition, etc. Are we only going to have Ethernet services? Or a mix of legacy ones? Do we already have an MPLS core? Are we a mobile operator whi just needs Ethernet connectivity for our RAN and core
(and not M-PBN)?

BT's use of PBT can be seen as being V2 of their 21CN initiative. Why have EoSDH or Dry Martini EoMoS)? Why not Ethernet end-to-end (drawing WDM as far out as possible)? Ethernet UNI, EFM (802.3ah) and Ethernet tunnels to the MPLS core?

Kit-wise, it is the considered wisdom that PBT gear is cheaper than MPLS gear and T-MPLS gear???). I believe 30% is a figure widely mentioned. But it's difficult to give an estimate on OPEX until we have a sizeable PBT and T-MPLS network in operation to compare.
Page 1 / 3   >   >>
Sign In