|
Networks & Infrastructure
C5: Siemens Bangs PBT Drum
Operator Interest Growing, Claims Vendor
by Ken Wieland
Provider backbone transport(PBT), is what operators are crying out for. At least that’s the view of Siemens Communications (now part of Nokia Siemens Networks), which is pushing hard to promote this new carrier Ethernet flavor (see PBB-TE Ups Ante on Ethernet Transport).
“It’s generating a lot of interest from operators,” says Eyal Rosen, vice president of marketing at Siemens. “A lot of people believe it will happen.”Using point-to-point Ethernet “tunnels” in the core of the network, PBT protagonists say it is a far more cost-efficient way of managing traffic than IP/MPLS, which has so far been the preferred core NGN architecture.
BT and China Telecom are believed to be trialling PBT and Rosen says Siemens is working with other operators to try it out, although he wouldn’t name names.If PBT did start to gain momentum, then the IP/MPLS vendors might be on the back foot.
Alcatel-Lucent, which supplies IP/MPLS routers to BT 21CN, has yet to show interest in developing a PBT proposition. It is naturally skeptical about PBT’s credentials to meet operators’ network management requirements.
“A lot of traffic is increasingly becoming multicast [point-to-multipoint] but PBT is not suited to that,” says Phil Tilley, vice president of regional marketing (Europe) at Alcatel-Lucent’s IP Division.
Rosen concedes that PBT is not yet ready to deliver multicasting but believes this shortcoming and others will be overcome.
“I would say PBT is probably in year one of a seven-year developments cycle,” he says. “It’s not yet perfect but PBT has the potential to do to IP/MPLS what IP/MPLS has done to ATM and SDH in terms of technology displacement.”
Mick Reeve, former CTO at BT and who initiated the UK incumbent’s investigation into PBT, feels the debate surrounding PBT and IP/MPLS – steered by the vendors – is in danger of becoming over-simplified.
“PBT and IP/MPLS shouldn’t be seen as either or,” he says. “I think, initially at least, that Ethernet can be used in the backhaul with MPLS switches at the core. What is true is that PBT will revolutionize Ethernet.”
But even if PBT developed sufficiently to allay operators’ concerns about core network implementation, it wouldn’t necessarily mean the end of the road for IP/MPLS suppliers – provided they can drastically lower their prices.
According to Atrica, a metro Ethernet supplier, they have plenty room for maneuver to do so.
“Ethernet vendors are selling switches and routers to get about a 40% margin,” says Umesh Kukreja, Atrica’s director of product marketing. “IP/MPLS vendors are getting margins of nearer 80%.”
At the beginning of C5 World Forum, Chinese vendor Huawei (see C5: Huawei Unveils “Unique” WDM/OTN Solution) looked set to add its weight to PBT with the promise of an official announcement. It never materialized. Huawei wouldn’t say why it had second thoughts over the timing of its PBT statement.More Information:
PBB-TE Ups Ante on Ethernet Transport
Carriers are seeing value in the emerging IEEE standard for Ethernet transport, PBB-TE (Provider Backbone Bridging-Traffic Engineering).
C5: Huawei Unveils “Unique” WDM/OTN Solution
Former BT CTO Backs Vendor’s Claims
C5: BT, Telecom Italia Disagree On NGN Marketing
‘How Much Should Customers Know?’ Ask Operators
C5: Metro ROADM Blocks In Europe
Market Lags North America By 12-24 Months, Says Analyst
|
