Tópico: [EN] B100G - Beyond 100G
11-03-2014, 08:10 #1
[EN] B100G - Beyond 100G
As OFC takes place this week, announcements and discussions focus on the topics of 400G transport versus 1 Terabit transport and how to get to the B100G (Beyond 100G) end game as quickly as possible.
In October 2006, at Light Reading's Optical Expo conference in Dallas, renowned AT&T Labs Vice President Simon Zelingher (now retired) made a passionate case for the need for 100G transport, predicting: "We will need 100 Gbit/s by the end of the decade."
Despite heavy skepticism, Zelingher's prediction proved amazingly accurate. The first commercial 100G cards were shipped at the end of 2009 -- for Verizon Communications Inc., not AT&T Inc. -- setting the 100G migration in motion.
Fast forward to the present, and 100G has already overtaken 10G, in terms of capacity shipped in long haul networks. As well, 40G transport, which held promise just a couple of years ago, is now on a path of sharp decline, because the capacity and cost-per-bit advantages of 100G cannot be matched.
Today the optical industry buzz is all about "beyond 100G" bit rates. As OFC takes place this week, announcements and discussions focus on the topics of 400G transport versus 1 Terabit transport and how to get to the B100G (Beyond 100G) end game as quickly as possible.
While we welcome progress, Heavy Reading sounds a strong note of caution regarding the widespread commercialization of B100G. While B100G is an appropriate topic for forward-looking optical conferences such as OFC and ECOC, the industry risks getting well ahead of itself in the need for B100G adoption.
In researching our newest Heavy Reading report -- The Rise of 100G & Terabit Transport Networks -- we found that the drivers for B100G are simply not in place, and that 100G is by far the best tool for the job for long haul networks during the next five years.
Here are our main arguments to counter the B100G commercialization hype:
- Historically, the telecom bit rates have increased in 4x increments (i.e., 155 Mbits, 622 Mbit/s, 2.5 Gbit/s, 10 Gbit/s). While some operators did move to 40 Gbit/s, the vast majority did not. For most service providers, the 100G migration marks the first 10x jump in network capacity as they move from legacy 10 Gbit/s networks to 100G. This 10x jump in bit rates is giving service providers an unprecedented boost in capacity.
- Although it is not often discussed in our industry, the fact is that the rate of Internet traffic growth is slowing, governed by the law of large numbers. A quick look at Cisco’s widely-cited Visual Networking Index (VNI) findings reveals this trend. Cisco’s VNI forecasts that global IP traffic will increase at a 23% CAGR from 2012-2017. Cisco's 2011-2016 forecast CAGR was 29%. The 2009-2014 forecast CAGR was 34%, and a few years prior to that, the CAGR was in the 50% range. The Internet is not shrinking, but the growth rates are slowing.
- Economics will ultimately dictate the timing of the next bit rate adoption. This simple truism is often overlooked as our technology-driven industry focuses on, Can it be done? and then on Can it be done economically? However, the real question for B100G must be, Can it be done more economically than 100G? As 100G has entered the volume production phase and as component companies focus their efforts on 100G cost reductions, B100G technologies will not be able to compete with 100G on a cost per bit basis over the next five years, we strongly believe.
Work on B100G must occur now in order to build the technology innovations and sustainable ecosystem for a commercial B100G future. It is the myth of B100G urgency today that we are hoping to dispel in this blog and in our related research.
As the industry takes a realistic view of B100G timing, it does bring up an interesting point that requires thought and discussion. Suppliers have rallied around 400G as the next-generation bit rate because it is the most doable option considering a near-term time horizon. However, if the need for B100G is not so urgent, does 400G really make the most sense? Or should suppliers set their sights on another 10x jump to 1 Terabit transport?
We don't believe this issue has yet been settled.
— Sterling Perrin, Senior Analyst, Heavy Reading
Última edição por 5ms; 11-03-2014 às 08:21.
11-03-2014, 08:15 #2
The Rise of 100G & Terabit Transport NetworksThe road to 100Gbit/s (100G) transport was a long one that began around 2006, just as the first commercial 40G networks were being deployed. It was also during that year that prominent AT&T Labs Vice President Simon Zelingher (now retired) made a passionate case for the need for 100G transport in his keynote address at Light Reading's Optical Expo conference in Dallas: "We will need 100 Gbit/s by the end of the decade," he stated. AT&T (along with Comcast) pioneered commercial 40G transport in 2006, and his comments were greeted with a great deal of skepticism by many. However, Zelingher's prediction proved amazingly accurate: The first commercial 100G cards were shipped at the end of 2009 (for Verizon, not AT&T), and the 100G commercial migration was set in motion in 2010.
In 2011, Heavy Reading published a report on the 100G evolution entitled 100Gbit/s Transport: Forecast & Analysis. At that time, 100G line rates and 100G Ethernet had been fully standardized, and 100G commercial deployments were just beginning, led by Ciena and Alcatel-Lucent. At that time, we concluded that 100G was being positioned as a "mass-market" backbone transport technology to ultimately replace 10G networks.
Also at that time, 40G transport was hitting its stride, with global deployments being led by Alcatel-Lucent, Ciena, Huawei, Cisco, Nokia Siemens Networks, Fujitsu and others. The transition away from 40G and toward 100G was being set up in early 2011, but the storyline had yet to play out. And although there were a couple of "hero" experiments surfacing at optical technical conferences, there had been very little discussion about the next bit rate beyond 100G. To many, such consideration seemed light years away.
Fast forward three years to the present, and progress in the optical industry has been rapid. 100G has risen to prominence in long-haul networks and, in terms of capacity shipped, has already overtaken 10G. 40G transport, which held promise just a couple of years ago, is now on a path of sharp decline as the capacity and cost-per-bit advantages of 100G cannot be matched. And the subject of "beyond 100G" (B100G) speeds, virtually non-existent in early 2011, is a key piece of any supplier/operator interactions on 100G. Operators need to know: How will you migrate to the next bit rate?
As 100G enters mass commercialization and B100G proceeds to trials, Heavy Reading takes a fresh, in-depth look at the near- and medium-term future of 100G transport and B100G. Understanding the trajectory of 100G and B100G is critical for the success of any DWDM systems or components supplier.
The Rise of 100G & Terabit Transport Networks tackles the challenges and opportunities of high-speed DWDM transport, in both long-haul and metro networks, looking at both 100G and B100G. The report presents comprehensive forecasts for long-haul and metro DWDM transport, with breakouts for units shipped, capacity shipped, revenue contribution by port speed and more. In addition, the report analyzes key enabling technologies for B100G and provides a roundup of significant B100G trial activity over the past year.
The report also profiles 10 leading optical systems vendors, detailing their products and strategies for 100G as well as for B100G.
Calculating market share is a difficult exercise, because there is not consistent reporting for 100G among the various suppliers. Still, Heavy Reading feels it is important to calculate some market share data to aid in understanding the market dynamics and the market players. Based on our calculations, Huawei was the leading 100G DWDM supplier in 2013 by a wide margin, capturing 34 percent of 100G systems revenue during the year, as shown in the excerpt below.
Heavy Reading forecasts global long-haul DWDM revenue to increase from $4.2 billion in 2013 to $5.8 billion in 2018, representing a 6.6 percent CAGR over the forecast period. While overall revenue growth will be modest, there will be major swings in the individual port contributions: 10G and 40G will experience rapid declines, as 100G revenue rapidly rises to backbone dominance. The excerpt below breaks out Heavy Reading's forecast for long-haul DWDM revenue share by port speed through 2018, illustrating the dramatic shift occurring in backbone line rates.
11-03-2014, 11:07 #3
- Data de Ingresso
- Oct 2010
- Rio de Janeiro
10G já é caro demais, e 100G é pornograficamente caro...
11-03-2014, 11:49 #4
" ... cost-per-bit advantages of 100G cannot be matched"
11-03-2014, 15:18 #5
Colt Deploys ADVA 100G Core to Answer UK Enterprise Data DemandLondon, U.K. March 11, 2014. ADVA Optical Networking announced today that Colt has deployed the ADVA 100G Core to address bandwidth growth from its U.K. enterprise customers. A customer of ADVA Optical Networking for over 15 years, Colt chose the ADVA 100G Core technology because of its plug-and-play simplicity and ease of use. The ADVA 100G Core has been optimized to interoperate with all major optical transport systems and enables Colt to upgrade existing customer networks without disrupting data traffic or making additional costly installations. This optimization ensures enterprise customers can rapidly scale from 10G to 100G and beyond.
“Our enterprise customers have some of the most rigorous networking demands in the world. They need long-term partners they can trust, a network they can depend upon,” said Peter Coppens, Network Services Solution Line Director, Colt. “That’s why our relationship with ADVA Optical Networking is so important. They don’t just build great technology; they help us build trust and long term relationships, which are key for our customers. With the ADVA 100G Core, the team at ADVA Optical Networking has produced something that answers a definite pain point – how can I migrate to 100G without major upgrades. This is a question that our customers no longer have to worry about.”
Colt’s enterprise customers include some of the world’s largest financial institutions, media companies and professional services organizations. Its customers are experiencing expanding bandwidth requirements and need a supporting network that can scale in line with their business demands. Fully integrated into the ADVA FSP 3000, the ADVA 100G Core provides this scalability, ensuring seamless migration as and when required. However, to ensure that all of its customers can benefit from 100G, Colt is also trialing the ADVA 100G Metro. This direct detect technology provides data transport over shorter distances and delivers significant cost, power and space optimization – an ideal combination for metro applications.
“We’re continually listening to our customers, continually listening to their needs. It’s this information that drives our focus, that drives our technology,” commented Alistair Swales, senior vice president, Sales U.K. and Ireland, ADVA Optical Networking. “That’s why our 100G portfolio is proving so successful. It addresses specific applications with tailored performance metrics. For enterprises that require 100G technology but don’t want to make costly upgrades, then our ADVA 100G Core fits perfectly. Yet we strongly believe that every customer should be given the opportunity to access 100G. Ultimately, this is the very essence of our 100G Metro and with Colt’s trial of this technology the U.K. enterprise community may soon have 100G technology for every networking need.”
Watch ADVA Optical Networking’s latest 100G Metro video for further information: adva.li/100metro.
11-03-2014, 15:23 #6
12-03-2014, 09:10 #7
Navigating New Networking Trends: Beware of the Urge to Over-EngineerEmerging applications – including on-demand video, cloud services and synchronous replication – are increasing data center interconnect bandwidth demand more than ever before. Operators are grasping at the optical trends they hope will support the mass amounts of data crossing their network. However, it is crucial to recognize that networking approaches that are successful for traditional service providers might not translate into the right approach for the data center.
Service providers and data centers each have a specific role in keeping the data flowing across the network. Service providers offer end-user access and are responsible for transporting user’s information across the network. Data centers are responsible for storing, managing and disseminating that data. Service providers make money from the bits flowing across the network. Data centers make money from the applications and information at the ends of those connections.
Many data centers, however, are actually using equipment and techniques that were designed for traditional service providers. Operators need to be careful they do not fall prey to over-engineering their networks to telecom standards when it’s not required. Instead, they should focus on building a network that delivers the functionality to support current services while providing a future path to meet growing customer demand.
There are many differences between service provider and data center optical networks, but the main areas where data centers can drive efficiency and innovation fall into a few categories.
1. Transport Layer vs. Application Layer
While service providers make their revenue from transport, where reliability and Service Level Agreements (SLAs) drive network design, data center operators make their revenue from applications and content, where cost and capacity drive network design.
Service providers are required to have multiple layers of redundancy in the transport layer in order to ensure the highest level of service and customer satisfaction. Generally, these transport layer requirements do not exist for data centers, as they rely on the packet layer for resiliency.
To increase revenue, data centers aim to quickly boost capacity to locations. Data center operators should focus on innovation at the application layer and consider new options such as leasing capacity and alternate routing. While these alternative approaches would not meet service provider requirements, these options can provide data centers with benefits like a more predictable expenditure model, the flexibility to scale capacity as needed and the ability to better safeguard data by rerouting at the packet layer.
2. Port Density vs. Cost Per Port
For service providers, port density is a paramount concern, while data centers focus on cost per port. This difference is reflected in the split between 100G port deployment by service providers and the continued use of 10G ports by data center operators. Service providers will pay extra for high-density ports, because each port is a revenue-generating entity and translates into more revenue in less space.
Data centers are less concerned with density and more concerned with cost per port and internal network flexibility. With the high cost of 100G ports on routers and the need to re-purpose ports quickly, a network based on dense 10G ports is more appropriate.
However, with the rapidly decreasing cost and size of 100G optics and the ability of emerging pluggable 100G coherent solutions to coexist with 10G signals, data center operators should be preparing for 100G deployments within their network. Deploying platforms that offer plentiful 10G port capacity, and include the option to add on additional 100G interfaces as either 10x10G muxponders or as native 100G interfaces, can be a very effective approach.
3. Fiber Standards: Long-Distance vs. Short-Distance
Long-distance dark fiber is generally difficult to lease and requires more advanced optical knowledge and access to intermediate sites for amplification and regeneration. This usually leaves data center operators considering hardware requirements for shorter reach and metro distances (where fiber is available) and using leased bandwidth for longer spans. Service providers, who own long-distance fiber, must consider hardware requirements for a much wider variety of applications, including long-distance routes that may carry a wide spectrum of signal types.
Because the majority of data centers lease short-distance fiber for a smaller portfolio of service types, there is no need to select networking platforms that are built for long distance, multi-service deployments and can be over-engineered and complex.
4. Support Staff and Simple Solutions
Finally, data center operators need simple, point-to-point solutions that do not have complex operations, are easy to deploy and do not need to be touched after installation. While service providers have a constant support team to organize part numbers, learn complicated software structures, and constantly update software licenses, this is not the case for data centers. Data centers require simple, low-cost solutions that can easily be operated without worrying about the details of optical technology. Optical interconnect should look like virtual fiber, and data center operators should evaluate their equipment choices appropriately.
It can be easy for data center operators to become enchanted by emerging and exciting service provider-designed solutions for optical networking. However, it is critical that the data center operator remains focused on the unique needs—and capabilities—of the data center network. By addressing their current network challenges and opportunities, they can easily avoid over-engineering the network and continue to successfully manage their high profile role in the data revolution.
Scott T. Wilkinson is senior director, technical marketing, MRV Communications. He leads a team of industry and technology experts focused on educating internal resources and external customers on market trends, new technologies, and recent innovations in MRV’s lines of optical and packet product lines.