The MPLS-OPS Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS-OPS Archive>month:2001-Apr> msg00075



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

RE: ATM-LSR do they use OSPF/IS-IS or PNNI??

  • From: "Donkin, Richard" <rdonkin@orchestream.com>
  • Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 18:14:09 +0100
  • Resent-Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 15:30:28 -0400
  • To: "'Geoff Bennett'" <geoff.bennett@marconi.com>, "Donkin, Richard" <rdonkin@orchestream.com>, MP LS <stagempls@hotmail.com>, mpls-ops@mplsrc.com, mpls@UU.NET

> From: Geoff Bennett [mailto:geoff.bennett@marconi.com]
...
> ...  In other words, I fully accept that IP VPNs should
> make more money than a basic Internet service.

Good to hear :)

> But as I understand it, the added value from IP VPNs either comes from
> security (whether this is "isolational" in nature like an ATM or Frame
> Relay VPN, or "truly secure" as in the case of an ecrypted ATM or IPSec
VPN
> is up to the user), or from "perceived service enhancement".  

Many operators are initially interested in the VPN service, i.e. isolational
security - QoS/CoS is seen as a supplement, particularly since it requires
CE management, and is therefore harder to scale, and requires
customer-specific classification/marking, which means more involvement with
customer requirements than a non-CoS VPN service.  In other words, something
like today's successful Frame Relay services, but with better provisioning
scalability for the provider, and the option of adding QoS/CoS services on
top.

> The latter could be via a CoS mechanism, which MPLS can potentially 
> offer, or from a hard QoS mechanism which can only be offered from...
> 
> a: A TDM mechanism (like SONET/SDH, which is expensive).
> b: A native ATM service.
> c: An over-provisioned stat mux service (eg. IP), which is also expensive
> in the long term.

I'm not clear about the current market for hard-QoS services (partly because
of the CoS factors above, plus the extra QoS parameters that must be
specified, again with customer input), but MPLS TE + CoS features does
enable firmer QoS than currently possible with IP alone. Comparison with ATM
QoS is probably a religious issue, and left as an exercise to the reader... 

 > I know that Orchestream's core business is based on the provision of
> services over an MPLS core, so this may be akin to asking a 
> barber if he
> thinks I need a haircut, but is there any evidence that IP 
> VPN services are
> "truly profitable" (as opposed to "press release" 
> profitable)?  the problem
> is that asking most SPs this question will result in "sorry, 
> this is very
> confidential information" responses.

Information on profitability is of course hard to come by, and I am on the
technical side not business, but I don't see why MPLS VPNs cannot be more
profitable than the equivalent Frame Relay services, given better
scalability, simpler provisioning (particularly if non-CoS), etc.  In fact,
MPLS VPNs can be delivered as FR services, e.g. AT&T's 'IP enabled Frame
Relay' which is really an MPLS VPN service internally.

Cheers,

Richard

> 
> At 19:38 18/04/01 +0100, Donkin, Richard wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Geoff Bennett [mailto:geoff.bennett@marconi.com]
> >> Sent: 18 April 2001 11:15
> 
> >> To: MP LS; mpls-ops@mplsrc.com; mpls@uu.net
> >> Subject: Re: ATM-LSR do they use OSPF/IS-IS or PNNI??
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Hi Niels,
> >> 
> >> There may be some confusion arising depending on how you 
> >> configure the ATM
> >> switch.  In effect there are three modes of operation for 
> >> this device...
> >> 
> >> 3.  Ships in the Night (SIN).  In this case, both ATM and 
> MPLS Control
> >> Planes operate simultaneously.  ATM signalling happens on VCI 
> >> 5, and MPLS
> >> signalling on VCI 32.  VCs that are set up as a result of 
> >> signalling are
> >> "owned" by one or other of these control planes.   SIN 
> would allow an
> >> operator to continue to run high revenue voice services (and 
> >> maybe existing
> >> Frame Relay or native ATM services...they make money too)  
> >> over the ATM
> >> "character" of the switch.  They can then run the 
> loss-making Internet
> >                                            
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >> services over the MPLS character.
> >^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> >Very amusing... I'm sure this was just flame-bait, but first 
> of all, MPLS
> >supports IP services, not just Internet traffic, and you can 
> of course run
> >highly profitable IP VPN services over MPLS.
> >
> >Ultimately, ATM/FR services (as seen by the customer) may 
> well be carried
> >over an MPLS core, particularly as MPLS becomes one of the 
> key signalling
> >mechanisms for all-optical core networks, but since much of 
> the traffic
> >running over ATM/FR is actually IP, it may be simpler to 
> deliver IP VPNs
> >directly to the customer premises. 
> >
> >> Cheers,
> >> Geoff
> >
> >Richard Donkin
> >T: +44 (0)20 7348 1507
> >Orchestream
> >Avon House, Kensington Village, Avonmore Road, London W14 8TS
> >T: +44 (0)20 7348 1500 F: +44 (0)20 7348 1501
> >www.orchestream.com
> >
> >
> >--
> >This communication contains confidential information 
> intended solely for
> the use of the individual/s and/or entity or entities to whom it was
> intended to be addressed.  If you are not the intended 
> recipient, be aware
> that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the 
> contents of this
> transmission is prohibited.  If you have received this 
> communication in
> error, please contact the sender immediately, delete this 
> communication
> from your system, and do not disclose its contents to any 
> third party, or
> use its contents.  Any opinions expressed are solely those of 
> the author
> and do not necessarily represent those of Orchestream Ltd or 
> its group of
> companies unless otherwise specifically stated.
> >
> >-------
> >The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
> >Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
> >Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml
> > 
> ================================================================
> Geoff Bennett                             			
> 					Tel: (33) 497 21 43 62
> Director of Technology, OCTO               			
> 			Fax: (33) 497 21 43 50
> Marconi
> Gaia - Bat. E                           			
> 		email: geoff.bennett@marconi.com
> BP 123
> 06903 SOPHIA ANTIPOLIS
> FRANCE
> ================================================================
> 
> -------
> The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
> Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml
> 

-------
The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml