Connecting the Ethernet island dots | June 13, 2008

When Cox Communications’ Las Vegas operation secured an order to provide a connection for a banking customer that decided to expand its reach into Reno, Nev., the MSO faced one major problem: It did not have the network to make the final connection.

Because Cox did not have network in Reno, the customer had to employ Cox for Ethernet in its current Las Vegas location then Charter Communications in Reno.

"It creates a couple of problems, the main one being [the bank now has] two vendors, two networks, two bills, and two different pricing structures, says Steve Walsh, sales director for Cox Business Services. "It becomes kind of cumbersome from a network management perspective. They approached us and said, ‘If there’s ever a way to deal with you as one provider, we would welcome that.’"

Instead of going to its main competitor, the ILEC, Cox decided to work with fellow MSO Charter to develop an Ethernet-network to network interconnection (E-NNI) agreement. Partnering with another MSO makes sense since the footprints of most cable companies tend to be limited to specific geographies and it’s unlikely they’ll compete for the same customer in a state region.

ILECs also are establishing their own pre-standard E-NNI agreements with carrier partners to extend Ethernet services into regions outside their network territories.

The reason why carriers, both large and small, are engaging in some form of pre-standard NNI arrangement is to address what Vertical Systems Group calls the major gaps in deploying Ethernet: fiber availability, price, scale and speed.

"One of the big issues with Ethernet is scalability," says Erin Dunne, director of research for Vertical Systems Group. "It’s hard to scale these types of networks and provide the types of value-added services enterprise customers are coming to expect, especially if they are migrating from legacy Layer 2 services such as frame, ATM or private line."

Cable sets path for national Ethernet expansion

Cable’s main story is, and probably always will be, about residential video services, despite that story being threatened by video rollouts from large ILECs such as AT&T and Verizon.

A proactive stance

The Metro Ethernet Forum NNI standards effort is still in the development stage, so large incumbent operators, competitive carriers and cable operators are taking a proactive approach to expand their Ethernet footprints via E-NNI arrangements. And while service providers are anxious to get an Ethernet NNI standard in place, they want to expand their respective domestic and international Ethernet footprints to serve their customers’ current needs today.

Take Verizon Business. Undoubtedly, the ILEC has been successful in expanding its Ethernet footprint in major national and international markets where it typically will use a carrier for point-to-point Ethernet access then move toward a formal Ethernet-NNI agreement.

"I don’t think we would be nearly as successful with Ethernet services without the ability to build pre-standard NNIs," says Alla Reznik, group manager for Ethernet and IP services at Verizon Business. "Ethernet is a high bandwidth service, so to get it to a customer you really need those partnerships to get to each location."

Similarly, Reliance Globalcom, formerly Yipes Enterprise Services, established pre-standard NNI agreements with Asia Netcom, KPN and interroute. As part of the larger Reliance family, Reliance Globalcom can now tap into its parent’s large bag of assets including the FLAG submarine cable system. Even so, the demand for increased reach will be more pressing.

"We have decent coverage where we are doing business today," says Shankar Narayanaswamy, vice president of network architecture for Reliance Globalcom. "As we grow the company and get customers in other places, the need for greater coverage becomes more acute because those companies being sold services through Reliance Globalcom will have connectivity into places where we don’t have much coverage."

“I don’t think we would be nearly as successful with Ethernet services without the ability to build pre-standard NNIs”

Alla Reznik, Verizon Business

Outside standards committees, vendors are also ready to lend a hand. ADVA Optical Networking, for instance, has developed a wholesale Ethernet demarcation device (FSP 150 CM) that can perform bulk termination of Ethernet services or inter-carrier handoffs for wholesale applications.

"The problem with Ethernet is you can’t get it everywhere, and there are people looking to buy wholesale Ethernet circuits to offer to other carriers," says Fred Ellefson, vice president of global marketing for ADVA Optical Networking. "E-NNI has been one of the key elements required. The MEF is working on [an E-NNI standard], but it’s still not there, so we went ahead with a pre-standard product because there’s so much customer need out there, and we’ll evolve with the standards as they sort themselves out."

Quality control

Ethernet, despite its promise of lower cost and greater bandwidth efficiency, does face a perception problem whether it’s over a provider’s own network or through a partner. Every service provider has an obligation when delivering any service: The end user wants the service available in all locations from one provider, but also with the same QoS that typically comes with traditional TDM-based services.

If all customer locations are on-net, delivering Ethernet is not a problem. The issue becomes more challenging when the customer goes off-net to a partner, since the service provider does not have direct control over the partner circuit.

If an enterprise is getting Ethernet service from one provider, it’s unlikely to accept the excuse, "Well, sorry the service is not working because our carrier partner is having issues."

One way to resolve this concern is the MEF’s tunnel access service concept. In a typical arrangement, the service provider has a customer with multiple Ethernet virtual connections (EVCs) carrying multiple services (e.g., Internet access, voice, E-LINE, MPLS). Tunnel access service enables the service provider to have a channel to the customer site and carry multiple virtual connections.

Tunnel access service enables the service provider to have a channel to the customer site and carry multiple virtual connections.

"The concept of the tunnel is to provide transparency," says Mike Tighe, MEF chairman and Verizon’s director of strategy and market intelligence. "This gets around having to map EVC to EVC. Most providers have not standardized on the same classes of service. So if you have a tunnel [with] a class of service, you can run multiple EVCs in the tunnel and you don’t have to align with the underlying provider on a class of service."

As the MEF works out these issues, service providers have developed their own guidelines for carrier partners to ensure proper QoS. Such processes take into consideration reach, price and availability of the transport medium (i.e., fiber and copper).

An initial hurdle is getting the two carriers to agree on their own parameters. Verizon Business, for example, goes through a rigorous testing process with its carrier partners to set up agreed-upon parameters. From there, it records the SLAs and then can determine the most appropriate partner.

"There are definite differences, and we’re working with the MEF to define what the E-NNI would look like," says Julian Cuschieri, product manager for Ethernet services at Verizon Business. "One of the big issues is different countries have their own ways to describe an E-NNI. We do a fairly extensive interoperability test usually for configuration issues on either our end or the carrier partner’s end."

In addition to setting the proper expectations, Reliance Globalcom has developed its own series of templates for working with other carriers. One of the templates used in NNI arrangements involves a common tagging interface. Reliance Globalcom will work with a carrier to add its tag and carry the MTU. From there, it will hand off the service to the customer or do tag swapping and tagging.

And while Reliance Globalcom has a good process for working out NNI arrangements with its own set of pre-standard templates, having a common standard in place to meet its growing international base will provide greater efficiency.

"With our much greater global focus with the acquisition by Reliance, we’ll have to put a lot more emphasis on international NNIs than we did in the past," Narayanaswamy says. "As we start working with more and more carriers, my hope is that the MEF work will happen quickly. Despite the fact it [involves] minor tweaks, it would be nice if they already knew what the standard was and we could come in and say, ‘Here’s the standards,’ and do the minor tweaks together."

Meanwhile, RCN Metro, while not the same size as a large incumbent, is seeing a similar trend. With a footprint limited to the Northeast and into the Chicago metro, the operator is looking at opportunities to expand into other countries for Ethernet and related enterprise services based on customer demand.

RCN Metro President Felipe Alvarez, while acknowledging a need for a lot of high-level legwork to process an NNI standard, says the next logical step is the "practical implementation" of making the NNIs work at the customer site.

"If your typical player orders an Ethernet circuit beyond our native Ethernet network, we need to provide end-to-end monitoring or operational, administration and maintenance (OAM) capabilities," he says. "To do that we have to develop a methodology efficiently and cleanly that meets the financial requirements."

Aside from solving the technical challenges in linking two networks, the MEF has a corollary effort to develop business practices for carriers and MSOs. Specifically, it will address how either an ILEC or a cable MSO can establish E-NNI arrangements with carrier partners.

"It’s really trying to come up with a standardized way to understand whether a service is available, what types of services, what SLAs, what price, and then can I place the order," Tighe says.

Similar to how service providers expanded their legacy service footprints, Ethernet service will remain in respective islands if such agreements don’t continue.