counter for iweb
Website
Silicon Photonics

Published book, click here

« Transmode's evolving packet optical technology mix | Main | Carrier Ethernet switch chip for wireless small cells »
Thursday
Dec062012

ECI Telecom’s next-generation metro packet transport family

  • The Native Packet Transport (NPT) family targets the cost-conscious metro network
  • Supports Ethernet, MPLS-TP and TDM
  • ECI claims a 65% lower total cost of ownership using MPLS-TP and native TDM

 NPT's positioning as part of the overall network. Source: ECI Telecom

ECI Telecom has announced a product line for packet transport in the metro. The Native Packet Transport (NPT) family aims to reduce the cost of operating packet networks while supporting traditional time division multiplexing (TDM) traffic.

“Eventually, in terms of market segments, it [NPT] is going to replace the multi-service provisioning platform,” says Gil Epshtein, product market manager at ECI Telecom. “The metro is moving to packet and so it is moving to new equipment to support this shift.” 

The NPT is ECI’s latest optimised multi-layer transport (OMLT) architecture, and is the feeder or aggregator platform to the optical backbone, addressed by the company's Apollo OMLT product family announced in 2011.

 

“The whole point of shifting to packet is to lower the [transport] cost-per-bit”

Gil Epshtein, ECI Telecom 

 

 

 

 

 

Packet transport issues

“Building carrier-grade packet transport is proving more costly than anticipated,” says Epshtein. “Yet the whole point of shifting to packet is to lower the [transport] cost-per-bit.”

Several packet control plane schemes can be used for the metro, a network that can be divided further into the metro core and metro access/ aggregation. The two metro segments can use either IP/MPLS (Internet Protocol/ Multiprotocol Label Switching) or MPLS-TP (Multiprotocol Label Switching Transport Profile). Alternatively, the two metro segments can use different schemes: the metro core IP/MPLS and metro access MPLS-TP, or MPLS-TP for the core and Ethernet for metro access.

Based on total cost of ownership (TCO) analysis, ECI argues that the most cost-effective packet control plane scheme is MPLS-TP. “The NPT product line is based on MPLS-TP, designed to simplify and make MPLS affordable for transport networks,” says Epshtein.

Three issues contribute to the cost of building and operating packet-based transport. The first is capital expenditure (capex) – the cost of the equipment and what is needed to make the network carrier grade such as redundancy and availability.

The second is operational expenditure or opex. Factors include the training and expertise needed by the staff, and their number and salaries. In turn, issues such as network availability, equipment footprint and the power consumption requirements.

“More and more operators view opex as a key factor in their TCO considerations,” says Epshtein. Operators look at the entire network and want to know what its cost of operation will be.

A third cost factor is the existence of both TDM and packet data in the operators’ networks. “When you look at the overall TCO, you need to take this into consideration,” says Epshtein. For some operators it [TDM] is more significant but it is always there, he says.

The NPT family is being aimed at various customers. One is operators that want to extend MPLS from the core to the metro network. “Here, TDM is not a factor,” says Epshtein. “We find this in wireless backhaul, in triple-play, carriers-of-carriers and business applications.” The second class of operators is those with legacy TDM traffic. Also being targeted are utilities. “Here reliability and security are key.”

 

Analysis

The choice of packet control plane - whether to use IP/MPLS or MPLS-TP -  impacts both capex and opex. How the TDM traffic is handled, whether using circuit emulation over packets or native TDM, also impacts overall costs.

According to ECI, the number of network elements grows some tenfold with each segment transition towards the network edge. In the network core there are 100s of network elements, 1000s in the metro core and 10,000s in the metro access. The choice of packet control plane for these network elements clearly impacts the overall cost, especially in the cost-conscious metro as the number of platforms grows. “A network element based on MPLS-TP is lower cost than IP/MPLS,” says Epshtein. “The main reason being it is a lot less complex.” 

He stresses that MPLS-TP is not a competing standard to IP/MPLS; IP/MPLS is the defacto standard in the network core. Rather, MPLS-TP is a derivative designed for transport. The debate here, says Epshtein, is what is best for metro.

“The main difference between the two standards is the control plane, not the data plane,” says Epshtein. MPLS-TP removes unnecessary control plane functions supported by IP/MPLS leading to simpler metro platform functionality, and simpler management and operation of the equipment. “We believe MPLS-TP is more suited to the metro due to its simplicity, scalability and capex benefits.”

Working with market research company, ACG Research, the TCO analysis (opex and capex) over five years using MPLS-TP was 55% lower than using IP/MPLS for metro packet transport (with no TDM traffic).

The cost savings was even greater with both packet and some TDM traffic. 

Using the NPT, capex goes up 5% due to the line cards needed to support native TDM traffic. But for IP/MPLS using circuit emulation capex increases 37%, resulting in the NPT having a 66% lower capex overall. The resulting opex is also 64% lower. Overall TCO is lowered by 65% using MPLS-TP and native TDM compared to IP/MPLS and circuit emulation.

 

NPT portfolio

ECI says its NPT supports circuit emulation and native TDM. Having circuit emulation enables the network to converge to packet only. But native TDM simplifies the interfacing to legacy networks and also has lower latency than circuit emulation.

 

The NPT packet switch and TDM switch fabrics and the traffic types carried over each. Source: ECI Telecom

 

There are five NPT platforms ranging from the NPT-1020 for metro access to the NPT-1800 for the metro core. The NPT-1020 has a 10 or 50 Gigabit packet switch capacity option and a TDM capacity of 2.5 Gigabit. The NPT-1800 has a packet switching capacity of 320 or 640 Gigabit and 120 Gigabit for TDM.

The metro aggregation NPT-1600 and 1600c (160 Gig packet/120 Gig TDM capacity) platforms are available now. The remaining platforms will be available in the first half of 2013.  

ECI says it has already completed several trials with existing and new customers.  "We have already won a few deals," says Epshtein.

The platforms are managed using ECI’s LightSoft software, the same network management system used for the Apollo. ECI has added software specifically for packet transport including service provisioning, performance management  and troubleshooting. 

 

Further information, click here.

Reader Comments (2)

I would be particularly interested in knowing if ECI has chosen BFD or Y.1731 path for the OAM of MPLS-TP and what are the reasons?

Faisal

December 7, 2012 | Unregistered CommenterFaisal

Faisal, ECI says it is implementing the BFD for the OAM. It also supports Y.1731 at the service level.

ECI suggests that you please approach the company directly so it can give you the information and detail you require.

December 14, 2012 | Unregistered CommenterRoy Rubenstein

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>