What's to Save Sycamore?

COMMENTS

Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View

<< < Page 2 / 3 > >>

Tom Yumsoop 12/4/2012 | 10:21:07 PM

re: What's to Save Sycamore? Mad Max,

Thanks for the intelligent response.

After reading your response, I quickly looked at the Sycamore website to become slightly familar with its product line.

Let's say we concentrate on what seems to be their "flagship" products, the SN16000MC and SN16000SC.

Also, for now, let's ignore the control plane (mesh based networks) aspects of Sycamore's strategy. I assume that the SN16000 products will handle the "termination" of multiple SONETs rings from the "access" and "core IOF" networks.

Based on my limited analysis, it seems that the SN16000 products would be similar in capabilities to the Lucent LambdaUnite.

Can you provide your insight on this comparison?

Thanks,
Tom

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

Mad Max 12/4/2012 | 10:21:05 PM

re: What's to Save Sycamore? I'm glad to offer (just another) opinion. Actually, that's the problem with the SN16000....it does not terminate rings. Similar to the IP model, protection is provided by rerouting failed signals through the mesh. Given that all ILECs heavily rely on rings, it makes network migration (to mesh) nearly impossible.

At the risk of being dismised as a Lucent groupie, I view the Unite as a supperior architecture in terms of optical technology used and (particularily) in terms of topology supported. It clearly fits the current (and long term) ILEC/IXC network model. (damn... now I've gone and shaken the bees nest!)

MM

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

chromatic aberration 12/4/2012 | 10:21:04 PM

re: What's to Save Sycamore? Mad Max
- Desh extended his contempt for telcom to his hiring practices, opting for router people rather than telcom people.
_________________________________________________

This contempt for 'all things old' probably explains the apparent contempt for quality as well. From what I've heard the equimpment they sold to a network in Bombay, India, was of extremly poor quality. Hardware, and the much touted software.

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

Tom Yumsoop 12/4/2012 | 10:21:04 PM

re: What's to Save Sycamore? Mad Max,

Thanks. I'm starting to understand.

Also, you have whetted my curiosity appetite.

Specifically, what in terms of optical technology used by Lucent is better?

(In a previous post, I believe you indicated that Sycamore used "off the shelf" technology. Can I assume that Lucent is better solely based on Lucent developed components?)

Thanks again,
Tom

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

Mad Max 12/4/2012 | 10:20:51 PM

re: What's to Save Sycamore? Hmmmm. I don't mean to imply that Sycamore has less capable componentry than Lucent just because they looked to others to design and build them. On a cost basis, it's probably just the opposite....and maybe on a technology basis as well. But I'd hate to get into who has what.

Strictly from a functionality perspective to the ILEC market, I don't see the OSPF/GMPLS only architecture as viable for several years... until OOO switching is need. The Unite is also (arguably) denser, cheaper and synergistic with the Lucent portfolio (Extreme, Router, DMX, Ion, etc.).

Regarding Sycamore's performance in India, every vendor has those horror stories. I believe Sycamore has overcome them.

MM

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

telco head 12/4/2012 | 10:20:49 PM

re: What's to Save Sycamore? MM.. thanks for providing good posts/reading.

I agree with your comments that ILECs need
the support for ring architecture.

The leading vendor in this space (Ciena) has
been adding the support for UPSR/BLSR so that
its solution can provide support for terminating
all the metro rings and in addition provide
mesh architecture in the core which is considered
more efficient. And sure, the vendors use
different solutions in there for switching e.g.
OSPF, GMPLS, PNNI etc.

Is SCMR not planning to support UPSR or BLSR?

telco head

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

Mad Max 12/4/2012 | 10:20:43 PM

re: What's to Save Sycamore? Is SCMR not planning to support UPSR or BLSR?

-------------

Good question. It doesn't appear to be in the plans today and it certainly goes against their existing strategy. But as part of their ongoing product/corpoate overhaul, they may reconsider.

Ciena took a big chance implementing a proprietary control plane(to GMPLS), but understood well the need to evolve the network and co-exist with rings.

MM

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

Outsider 12/4/2012 | 10:20:42 PM

re: What's to Save Sycamore? If Sycamore has all of these problems, which optical system company stock would you then invest in today to see some upside in the next 3 years? (Insiders, especially Sales people please speak up.)

Corvis
Tellium
Lucent
Nortel
Ciena/ONI
Cisco
Sycamore
Alcatel
MRV

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

lettherebelight 12/4/2012 | 10:20:39 PM

re: What's to Save Sycamore? MM,

You said: I'm glad to offer (just another) opinion. Actually, that's the problem with the SN16000....it does not terminate rings.

Although I am not a connoseur, all the information on their web site (even the diagrams) indicate that the SN16000 DO terminate rings (close rings). By the way, they also say they can terminate linear, ring, and mesh all at the same time in the same unit.

Am I wrong or are you misinformed about this?

LTBL

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

Phanatron 12/4/2012 | 10:20:39 PM

re: What's to Save Sycamore? The SN 16000 can terminate rings, meshes, and linear spans on the same box.

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

<< < Page 2 / 3 > >>