2. The Gartner ‘Vendor Influence Curve’ "The Leader" I understand my business and technical requirements in major areas of IT, and choose a key/strategic vendor for major initiatives that best meet those requirements. "The Miser" The market area is a commodity. I just buy on price . "The Optimist" I have a primary vendor partner and consider my partner as the primary influencer . "The Follower" My vendor is my only trusted advisor. I never look at other alternatives. Advantage to Vendor Advantage to Enterprise "The Tactician" I consider a number of tactical vendors when defining a solution . 1 2 4 5 3
3.
4.
5.
6.
7. Industry Bandwidth Requirements WiMax LTE DO Rev A HSDPA 2-4 T1s 4-6 T1s 12 Mb Eth 6 Mb Eth 14 Mb Eth 18 Mbps or 11 T-1 equivalents* 30 Mbps or 19 T-1 equivalents* Multiple Sources: Light Reading Research Panel: “Bringing Backhaul Connectivity to Cell Site” April 2007 and Internal Estimates CDMA 1xRTT WCDMA Total Bandwidth Requirements/Tower
8.
9.
10.
11. Current Metro Architecture CE Ethernet over E1s Ethernet handoff to customer Customer Premise Ethernet Ethernet Ethernet over E1s or E1s in STM-n L2 switch PE Router IP Service Edge DCS Ethernet over E1s or E1s in STM-n EoPDH CLE PDH Aggregation Router SDH ADM Local Switching Office (POP) SDH SDH ADM PDH/SDH Access Network TDM PDH circuits from Customer Premise to IP Service Edge TDM
12.
13.
14. Phase 3 Evolved CE Architecture CE Ethernet Over Fiber/Cu Ethernet handoff to customer Customer Premise Ethernet Ethernet over Fiber PE Router IP Service Edge CLE L2 Local Switching Office (POP) SDH L2 Ethernet Access Network Ethernet from Customer Premise to IP Service Edge Carrier Ethernet
15. Carrier Ethernet Building Blocks Point-to-Point EVC Carrier A E-NNI UNI Multi-point to Multi-point EVC UNI UNI Point-to-Point EVC UNI UNI UNI Link OAM 802.3ah End-to-end Service OAM: Fault-802.1ag Perform-Y.1731 Carrier B Make Ethernet “Manage” like Sonet/PDH
16.
17. What is the End Game ? Service Experience, Bandwidth & Global Interconnect Ethernet Distribution Access Aggregation C.O. User Focused Service Experience Automated Provisioning, End-to-End Service Assurance, Simplified Troubleshooting Global Service Interconnect via E-NNI, PBB, VPLS & MPLS 100G Ethernet Aggregation and Metro Core Subscriber, CPE and Access Residential E-FTTH Business E-FTTX 10G Ethernet 1 Gig Ethernet 1 Gig Ethernet Ethernet Mobile Backhaul Nx100G Ethernet over DWDM Rings Services Triple Play Business Ethernet Mobile Multimedia 100G Ethernet 100G Ethernet Transport
24. Extreme Industry Presence Stephen Haddock, Interworking Task Group Chair Steven Blake, PCN co-chair IEEE 802.1Qay PBB-TE Prakash Kashyup IEEE 802.1 Ethernet Switching Standa rds HSSG: Higher Speed Study Grp Tanmoy Roy IETF Routing Area MPLS, L2VPN, L3VPN, PWE3, OSPF IETF Internet/Transport Areas PCN, v6OPs, 6MAN ITU-T Study Group 15 Steven Blake G.8032 Ethernet Rings IRTP RRG Routing Research Group Ran Atkinson, Steven Blake Olen Stokes Ethernet Alliance Harpreet Chadha, Steven Blake Data Center Ethernet Subcommittee MEF Metro Ethernet Forum Peter Lunk, Stephen Haddock, Prakash Kashyup 40G & 100G Ethernet Focus on standards that make Ethernet Network Technologies more Resilient, Extensible, Adaptable & High Performance IEEE 802.3 HSSG IEEE 802.1 EVB Edge Virtual Bridging Steven Blake
Key Issue: What strategies should companies follow to maximize their data center network? Most enterprises rely too much on trusted vendors and make the transition from a traditional vendor relationship to one where the enterprise starts to cede control of the strategic direction for a specific part of their IT architecture. Ceding control enables the vendor to drive its agenda, which often does not fully align with the enterprise's business requirements, despite assuring words from the vendor. In many cases, the vendor is large and often dominant in its space, and it is possible to enable the vendor to exert too strong an influence in the IT organization. Through its controlling influence, the vendor typically will expand its offerings and will affect an increasingly larger portion of the architecture. The net result for the enterprise is a continued loss of control, with an increasing deviation from its true business requirements. In addition, the enterprise will likely pay an increasing premium for this non-optimal solution. The Vendor Influence Curve is a self-assessment model to aid enterprises in their relationships with key vendors. It is especially useful when dealing with very strong or dominant vendors in a particular marketplace or major element of IT. The Vendor Influence Curve is a five-level model overlaid on a two-dimensional axis where the vertical axis shows the value to the enterprise and the horizontal axis shows value to the vendor. The value to the enterprise peaks when the enterprise is at Level 3 on the Vendor Influence Curve. As the vendor influence increases beyond Level 3, the value to the vendor continues to rise, but the value to the enterprise drops. Understanding the balance between the buyer (the enterprise) and the seller (the vendor) provides tremendous advantages for enterprises that use the Vendor Influence Curve.
The benefits associated with delivering “any service to any device” places even more demands on Carrier Ethernet networks. No longer can services be delivered over dedicated networks, but rather, to maximize efficiency and profitability, all services need to be delivered over a common, flexible, intelligent network. As a result, the following characteristics must be pervasive throughout the network: Resilient: able to handle the increased scale and availability requirements Integrated: able to provide the flexibility to deliver all services and future new services efficiently over a single network Adaptive: able to adjust to the changing demands and requirements that the applications may place on it. These define the carrier principles for what we call “service oriented infrastructure”
SDH and its optical layer is the most widespread transport technology TDM, circuit based Carriers extended "smoothly" their circuit networks with packet transport capabilities 802.3, ESCON, FC… interfaces for link connection SDH next gen for packet services to circuit network adaptation bridges features for any-to-any connections Carriers have a large panel of transport solutions current solutions : IP/MPLS, bridged Ethernet new trend : provide tunneling… … with PBB-TE , VPLS , T-MPLS … Connection Oriented wave to " carry " Carrier Ethernet services Similarly to circuit (SDH) technologies
Why Ethernet Services ? Enterprises don’t want Carriers to know or route their IP addresses for site-to-site interconnections (VPNs) Ethernet enables Carrier’s network to transport and switch Enterprise IP traffic without interacting with Carrier Ethernet Terminology invented by the MEF to qualify Ethernet Services E-Line (P2P EVC between 2 UNIs) E-LAN (MP2MP EVC between >2 UNIs) E-tree (P2MP EVC between root and spoke UNIs) These services can be delivered over different types of networks (a.k.a "Transport network") Native Ethernet based (802.1, 802.3) Existing Packet transport networks (IP/MPLS) Existing TDM transport networks (SDH-NG, OTN)
Commence from the bottom up 802.3ah for local link monitoring 802.1ag for hierarchical service connectivity verification Y.1731 for end-to-end service performance monitoring Saying all that, all these standard have some duplicate capabilities in the fault and connectivity areas.