Angan Angan Anak Angin

Source: lightreading.com

A new standard for MPLS-based packet transport technology is being developed by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) in conjunction with the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in an effort to create a single standard that will rival PBB-TE in the next-generation packet/optical platform domain. (See A Guide to PBT/PBB-TE.)

The seemingly cordial and unprecedented collaboration between the standards bodies is an important step for MPLS equipment vendors, as, until now, there have been parallel but conflicting developments ongoing within the two influential organizations that was likely to result in market confusion and interoperability issues down the line. That scenario would have weakened the case for MPLS as a transport technology, potentially handing an advantage to the PBB-TE camp.

Parallel developments
Until recently, the IETF and ITU were working on similar, but different, standards developments that were both focused on specifying a stripped down, connection-oriented transport version of MPLS.

The International Telecommunication Union, Standardization Sector (ITU-T) , the body that develops transport technology standards, was close to finalizing its work on the Transport MPLS, or T-MPLS, earlier this year, and had reached the stage where protocol stacks were being deployed by vendors in their transport products. The IETF, meanwhile, was working towards the same goal by extending its MPLS standard.

But while the two developments had the same aim, there were notable differences: A key potential problem with the ITU’s T-MPLS is that it wasn’t compatible with regular MPLS.

That problem was recognized by both standards bodies, and (amazingly) they agreed to do something about it. In April, the ITU-T’s Study Group 15 noted in its newslog: “Fears that a set of next-generation network transport specifications developed by ITU-T could cause interoperability problems have been allayed. The IETF and ITU will work together to extend IETF MPLS functionality to address the needs of the transport network… The IETF and ITU-T will work jointly on the development of a transport profile for MPLS technology,” to be called MPLS-TP (transport profile).

So the two organizations formed a Joint Working Team (JWT), which will, along with a number of other groups, such as the IETF’s MPLS Interoperability (MEAD) team, and an ITU-T Ad Hoc MPLS group, will contribute reviews and submissions as part of the new IETF standards process.

Quick off the blocks
That process is moving faster than expected, according to Loa Andersson, chairperson of the IETF MPLS Interoperability Design (MEAD) Team and a Principal Networking Architect at Swedish R&D firm Acreo AB , who is coordinating the MPLS-TP efforts. Andersson sent the first set of documents — “individual drafts” that will later become working group documents — to the multiple reviewers on July 10, noting that “we are actually a bit better off than we planned.”

There are nine documents for review covering a range of management and network architecture issues: See the full list here.

Andersson tells Light Reading that “after the advice that the JWT produced and was accepted by the ITU-T, most of the actual work — writing the specifications — has been taken over by the IETF, and is now organized by the MEAD team and involves several IETF working groups, with support from Study Groups within ITU-T.”

And while the task looks daunting, the turnaround time is set to be relatively short, as the IETF and the ITU have already done a great deal of work on the details.

“MPLS-TP RFCs (standards) will start to appear during 2009, and we expect the effort will be completed during 2010,” notes Andersson in an email response to questions. “The target is to produce a MPLS-TP standard that meets to goal that we all agreed to — to be interoperable with [the] existing MPLS standard. We put huge effort into getting the right protocol design specialists, representing a good mix of telecom operators and vendors, taking active part in the development of the MPLS-TP.”

Vendor support
Most vocal among MPLS-TP’s vendor supporters is Alcatel-Lucent (NYSE: ALU - message board). (See AlcaLu Likes MPLS Move.)

“Bringing together the work already done by the ITU under the umbrella of the IETF is a good step forwards and will allow the industry to have one set of specifications for the IP and transport world,” says Lindsay Newell, VP of Product and Solutions Marketing at AlcaLu’s IP Division (IPD), who notes that major carriers such as AT&T Inc. (NYSE: T - message board), BT Group plc (NYSE: BT - message board; London: BTA), and Verizon Communications Inc. (NYSE: VZ - message board) have staffers involved in the standards process.

Newell, though, says it’s a bit too early to say just how close MPLS-TP will stick to the ITU’s existing T-MPLS work, and says things will be a lot clearer following the upcoming IETF meeting in Dublin (July 27 to August 1), where MPLS-TP is set to be discussed on the morning of July 30.

Newell, though, believes vendors will be able to start implementing MPLS-TP specification early in 2009, ahead of the standard’s completion. “It’s a rapid and aggressive timetable, but it’s realistic because MPLS-TP will be an extension to the MPLS protocol that is already a standard, [while] the important OA&M [operations, administration, and maintenance] has already been addressed by the ITU. The standard isn’t starting from a clean sheet of paper. We’re very optimistic.” So optimistic that Newell believes the standard could be completed in late 2009.

Newell notes that this particular standard is very important for AlcaLu as it will be utilized by two of the company’s main telecom infrastructure divisions — IP and Transport — and enable seamless connectivity between routers and transport platforms, for example, in a wireless backhaul deployment. “We’re seeing support from service providers for that,” adds Newell.

That fusion of packet and transport platforms is key to next-generation network deployments, notes Alberto Valsecchi, VP of marketing at AlcaLu’s optical division. “Everyone understands the transformation that is happening in packet growth and the convergence of IP and transport. It’s important to make that happen,” he adds.

Valsecchi says there has been market interest in T-MPLS, which is already implemented in AlcaLu’s 1850 transport platform, and which has been tested by several customers. He believes it has been beneficial for vendors and carriers to have worked with an early version of MPLS transport specifications, and that his division will support and evolve to the MPLS-TP specs as they become available.
While Valsecchi had no hesitation is pledging full and complete support for the shift in control to the IETF, not all vendors have such complete faith in the move.

Vendor caution, support for PBB-TE
Tellabs Inc. (Nasdaq: TLAB - message board; Frankfurt: BTLA) has been marketing a transport version of MPLS for several years — one representative of the company jokingly referred to “Tellabs MPLS” during a T-MPLS debate at the Carrier Ethernet World Congress event in Madrid in 2006 — and is keeping a close eye on developments at the IETF.

John Sauer, director of Technical Marketing at Tellabs, says his company “will build whatever carriers need to solve their problems. That’s how T-MPLS came about — in response to carriers’ needs.”
He says Tellabs had “what amounted to T-MPLS — a simple version of MPLS for transport — implemented on our 6300 managed transport platform before it was called T-MPLS. There was a need for it then, and there’s a need for it now. T-MPLS is a very good solution.”

Sauer says Tellabs currently supports T-MPLS, which is mature enough to be confidently supported and deployed, on its 6300 product and the 8600 platform for wireless backhaul deployments, and “we’re glad to see the IETF and ITU working together on MPLS-TP.”

But he notes that “if MPLS-TP retains the simplified approach of T-MPLS, then we will move to that, but it needs to have the same functionality. The main thing we are looking for is the simplicity and the same goals that the ITU had developed. We’re confident the IETF will ratify the [ITU] standard, but there may be some small changes.”

And with carriers’ needs in mind, Tellabs is going to support PBB-TE too “as part of our carrier Ethernet offering. We see both as valuable tools for our customers. We need both.”

Sauer says there are two ways to “tackle carrier Ethernet transport. One is with MPLS, including T-MPLS. That makes sense where a customer has an existing MPLS infrastructure, or if there are multiservice requirements. But there are customers that have requirements where PBB and PBB-TE would be most suitable, in pure Ethernet instances.”

However, PBB-TE is “not a standard yet. We see promise, but it’s not a proven solution,” notes Sauer.

Faceoff with PBB-TE

PBB-TE’s supporters still believe the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc. (IEEE) will be able to deliver standards specifications as early as the first quarter of 2009, and be able to make inroads with carriers looking to adopt converged packet/optical transport architectures.

PBB-TE has taken some knocks in recent months, most notably at BT, but again its supporters note that its real forté is point-to-point transport links, whereas BT had been considering a much more widespread use of the still-emerging technology. (See PBT Sidelined at BT and Analyst: PBT’s Not Dead Yet.)


That PBB-TE is still very much in contention by carrier transport teams has been highlighted by Heavy Reading analyst Sterling Perrin, who has just written an analyst note on the issue. (See To PBB or Not to PBB?.)

He believes the IETF and ITU have made the right move, but that the MPLS-transport sector is now effectively on hold for a while.

“Ultimately, an MPLS-TP standard that is consistent with the IETF and with MPLS is a good thing. But, for the near term at least, it does complicate things. The standard has been pulled back to square one — with a lot of working groups working on different parts. PBB-TE supporters will be hoping that the working groups get hung up on differences. If they do, it will be great news for PBB-TE,” notes the transport technology specialist.

But as Tellabs’s Sauer noted, PBB-TE is still bogged down in the standards process itself, and hasn’t had the benefit of a lot of OA&M work, something from which the MPLS-TP process benefits.
That point is already being hammered home by MPLS-TP’s chief cheerleader, AlcaLu, which has taken just about every possible opportunity to take a public pot-shot at PBT/PBB-TE. (See AlcaLu’s Alwan: PBT Will Lose Its Shine and Vendors Clash Over PBT.)

The giant vendor’s representatives were at it again at a recent Light Reading Live! Mobile Backhaul event in London, where AlcaLu marketing executive Phil Tilley remarked how long it had taken for MPLS to become a settled standard — a position, he noted, that PBB-TE would take a very long time to attain. (See Carriers Don’t Trust Ethernet Backhaul?)

“Never say anything is dead, but what is clear is that it takes a long time to get something standardized — it has taken MPLS 10 years. In a few years’ time, no one will remember PBT. Anyone who thinks PBB-TE could be standardized in just a few years has clearly been smoking something,” he quipped during a panel session.

And he wasn’t talking about the peacepipe.
— Ray Le Maistre, International News Editor, Light Reading