-
8/11/2019 PTN vs Dual Fabric POTS for SDH Migration 1212
1/6
www.orcki t.com
Pushing technology to the edge
2011 Orckit-Corrigent
Over the past several years, telecommunication service providers have been experiencing a dramatic
shift from legacy TDM circuits to next generation Ethernet traffic. This shift has been driven by
both residential triple-play services and business Ethernet services, and it has also been marked
by the introduction of Ethernet-based 3G Node B and 4G/LTE mobile networks.
Nevertheless, the demand for SDH circuits is expected to remain solid. While small offices and
home offices (SOHO) have already made the shift towards Ethernet services (mostly based
on broadband xDSL and CATV services), two significant market segments present an ongoingdemand for legacy TDM services.
The first is medium and large enterprise customers. Although such companies are moving to
Ethernet based services, many of them maintain their legacy systems. Carriers, therefore,
will continue to provide them with TDM services. The other segment that demands legacy
services is the mobile market. In order to prevent major forklift upgrades, mobile operators
will continue to support 2G and 3G infrastructure. These technologies contribute to the
SDH demand in metro networks.
Therefore, it is clear that for the foreseen future, TDM and Ethernet will have to coexist
in the metro. Yet, initial deployments of carrier Ethernet solutions have not offered any
support for SDH. Standards bodies such as the MEF decided to focus on the transport of
PDH rates with circuit emulation services but did not define a circuit emulation techniqueor demand for real, high-rate SDH services.
As a result, most of the carriers today use two separate transport systems in their metro
area networks: The first is a legacy SDH network (or MSPP based Next Generation
SDH). At the same time, they have also deployed a packet network composed of
Layer2 aggregation (in some cases, Carrier Ethernet-based aggregation) and a Layer3
IP-MPLS core.
Packet Transport Networks (PTN) equipment and Packet Optical Transport
Systems (POTS) are innovative solutions that address the challenge of an integrated,
single-layer approach for a next generation metro network. Both solutions include
advanced technologies to address Ethernet and SDH in their native forms.
For the foreseen future,
TDM and Ethernet will
have to coexist
-
8/11/2019 PTN vs Dual Fabric POTS for SDH Migration 1212
2/6
-
SDH
Processor
Dual Matrix
Packet Function
ProcessorProcessor
PacketData
Processor
UNI
Eth
ProcessorProcessor
SDH/TDMSDH TDM
NNI
Processor
Data
ProcessorEthPacket
Processor
TDM
SDH/TDM
ROADMDWDMCWDM
HO TDM Function
LOXC
Data
EoS
SDH
EoS
TDM
POTS products provide an integrated solution for several
technologies in a single box using a multipurpose centralized
switching fabric or dual matrix fabric architecture. Universalfabric is typically based on cell switching technology and is
capable of performing native packet switching and native SDH
switching simultaneously. The more popular implementationis the dual matrix architecture.
In some cases, interconnection between the TDM fabric and
the packet fabric by means of Generic Framing Procedure
(GFP) encapsulation enables Ethernet over SDH. In other
cases, interconnection between the TDM fabric and thepacket fabric impossible, leading to different fibers for Ethernet
and TDM services. POTS products can be designed so
that the packet switching technology of choice is PB/PBB/
PBB-TE/MPLS/MPLS-TP. For TDM switching, POTS can
be configured with High Order (HO) or Low Order (LO)
switching granularity for SDH. TDM tributaries may includelow rate services such as E1 and up to high rate STM-64
10G interfaces.
The separation of the two switching entities suggests that the
POTS platform is composed of two separate systems: packet
switch and TDM switch. Simply put, the POTS solution is
a combination of a Carrier Ethernet Switch and MSPP in
a single box.
Todays carriers environment generates a large amount of
SDH traffic and packet traffic that needs to be transportedbetween sites in the metro. The deployment of POTS would
require two fiber pairs for every link. One pair would beused to interconnect the SDH part of the network and the
other pair would be used to carry the Packet traffic. The
complete separation between the two technologies implies
that with POTS, the operator actually builds and maintains
two networks on the same physical node.
This significant waste of CAPEX (or OPEX, in the case of
leased fibers) is overcome in one of two ways: Ethernet
over SDH (EoS) or WDM/ROADM technologies withOTN capabilities.
With EoS, POTS implements Virtual Concatenation (VCAT),
Generic Framing Procedure (GFP) and Link Capacity
Adjustment Scheme (LCAS) on dedicated hardware to map
As illustrated in Figure no. 1, POTS that is based on dualmatrix fabric architecture implements both packet switch and
TDM switch. Dedicated hardware, interfaces, capacity, andpower consumption per switch, results in a costly and non
scalable design for high Ethernet capacity. In addition, this
architecture has inefficient fiber usage: blocking operation thatdoes not allow a single fiber to support any mixture of TDM
and Ethernet traffic on any distribution of line cards.
In systems where interconnection is not possible, the double
cost of the fiber infrastructure (or, alternatively, the additional
cost of enabling double the number of wavelengths in the
DWDM network) is prohibitive. With this approach, eachTDM service consumes both the working bandwidth and
the protection bandwidth, while it is desired that when
there is no network failure, protection bandwidth can be
reclaimed and used for excess data traffic. Eventually, two
networks are needed - TDM and packets. For example,in a case where 7Gbps of packet traffic and 2.5Gbps of
TDM traffic should be carried inter-city, it would requiretwo wavelengths to carry that traffic instead of one.
Ethernet into a standard SDH payload. This approach is very
inefficient for high capacities of packet traffic and services.
By using integrated WDM/ROADM with OTN capabilities
in POTS platforms, POTS can carry both SDH and Ethernetover a single fiber pair over 2 separate wavelengths or
2 sub-wavelengths. Although WDM/OTN technologies
significantly increase bandwidth, they also add a significant
amount of complexity and require special care by trained
professionals. Moreover, as operators often already use aWDM network in the metro, the integrated WDM and
ROADM capabilities of POTS adds little value. In this case,
deployment of POTS will require two wavelengths on an
existing WDM infrastructure.
The POTS solution
POTS Services and network architecture
Figure 1:
Typical POTS Architecture
Simply put, the
POTS solution is acombination of aCarrier Ethernetswitch and MSPP ina single box
-
8/11/2019 PTN vs Dual Fabric POTS for SDH Migration 1212
3/6
SDH technology uses an advanced OAM suite. With
a multilayer OAM approach, SDH offers the ability to
continuously monitor every single circuit, path, multiplexer
section and regenerator section, and initiate consequentactions (such as switch to protection) upon failures in these
layers. It also includes advanced Alarm Indication Signals
(AIS) and Remote Defect Indications (RDI), loopbacks
and alarm correlation tools.
Carrier-grade packet switching technologies are enhanced
to provide a similar level of OAM by providing standard
tools for OAM at different levels. At the Ethernet level,
IEEE 802.1ag - Connectivity Fault Management (CFM)
offers Continuity Check, Loopback and Link trace (trace
route) while ITU-T Y.1731 extends this standard and offers
service-level OAM enhancements such as AIS for alarm
indication and suppression and SLA verification delay,delay variation and frame loss rate.
Carrier Ethernet (CE) technology is ideally designed to
cater to Ethernet services in carrier network environments.
With Carrier Ethernet, carriers benefit from a complete
OAM solution as well as high availability and manageability
features. The underlying transport technology varies
from system to system and can be based on Ethernet
technologies, such as Provider Bridge or PBB/PBB-TE, or
on MPLS technologies, such as IP-MPLS (VPLS/VPWS)or the newly defined MPLS-TP.
A PTN solution was specially designed by Orckit-Corrigent
and integrated into its CM-4000 family of products offering
an enhanced Carrier Ethernet solution with unique
transport capabilities of SDH services. As an example, while
regular CE platforms implement SAToP and CESoPSN
circuit emulation technologies, they are limited to E1
circuits over packet and are far from providing a real
replacement for legacy TDM.
Although these standards are sufficient for Ethernet-based
packet forwarding (PB and PBB), additional OAM tools are
required for MPLS-based networks. This includes IETF
RFCs such as LSP Ping (RFC 4379) for data and controlplane connectivity check, performance monitoring (delay,
jitter and packet loss) and LSP Trace for fault isolation.
The use of POTS in a metro network requires full suite
SDH OAM and Packet OAM. As a result, operators should
actually manage two separate networks that happen to
share the same boxes. The operational complexity is high
and lack of any interworking functionality between the
Packet and TDM layers prevents the operational simplicity
promised by the POTS technology.
PTN solution is capable of providing circuit emulation
for any SDH payload. It also provides HO and LO cross
connection and grooming capabilities, fueling true network
convergence over a single platform and significantly
reducing OPEX.
Figure 2 below depicts the architecture of a typical PTN
platform. The system is built around a packet switch,
which handles all traffic flowing through the product. Asecond switch can be added and configured in standby
mode for 1:1 protection of the switching fabric.
In order to keep costs low, the switching fabric shares a
blade with Ethernet UNI and NNI ports. High port fan-
out is achieved by enabling the ports next to the standby
switch to be fully functional regardless of the status of
their collocated switch. With an extremely low entry
cost, additional services and interfaces are provided by
inserting extension modules. With a pure packet-based
switching fabric, the packet extension modules are also
very cost-efficient.
POTS Operation Administration andMaintenance (OAM)
The PTN approach
Figure 2:
Typical PTN System
Architecture
-
8/11/2019 PTN vs Dual Fabric POTS for SDH Migration 1212
4/6
A PTN is a pure packet network. With Layer 2 MPLS as
the underlying packet technology, PTN provides network-
wide Traffic Engineering, advanced QoS and Connection
Admission Control (CAC) for SLA assurance.
Circuit emulation packets are assigned with the highest
possible priority and strict priority queues. Synchronization
is also applied on the packet interfaces using Synchronous
Ethernet or IEEE 1588v2. QoS and network synchronization
provide SDH-like quality across the network and are used
to meet the required jitter, delay and wander performance
levels of TDM circuits.
PTN solution can provide a full set of SDH services over
packet networks using Circuit Emulation over Packets
(CEP) encapsulation. These services are transported
with the same delay, jitter and wander tolerances as in
traditional SDH systems and are compliant with ITU-T
and Telcordia specifications. The CEP implementation is
based on IETF standards and provides service protection
in under 50msec for fiber cut or node failure.
This effectively enables circuit switching of STM-1,
STM-4 and STM-16 signals together with HO/LO cross-
connections and grooming of multiple channelized STM-n
signals.
With the integration of Synchronous Ethernet and IEEE
1588v2 Technology, the PTN circuit emulation solution
is based on a synchronized packet network enabling it to
provide the same quality as traditional SDH networks.
The circuit switching (HO and LO cross connection) and
circuit emulation (converting TDM payload into packets)
is performed on the TDM interface cards. This maintains
a low cost for the packet services and adds the TDM cost
burden to the TDM interfaces alone.
The PTN OAM approach is significantly simple, compared
to the POTS OAM. With a single transport technology
for both packet and TDM, the only OAM tools that are
used are the Ethernet and MPLS OAMs. SDH OAM is
terminated by the TDM line cards, thereby significantly
simplifying the OAM processes.
PTN Services andnetwork architecture
PTN is Enabling TDMand Synchronization
PTN OperationAdministration and
Maintenance
Figure 3: Typical POTS and PTN cost breakdown
Case Study Cost comparison
POTS and PTN are optimized for converged solutions that offer a mixture of SDH and Ethernet services. A typical
node configuration would include the following characteristics:
Fully redundant node configuration for switching fabric, control and power
33% of the bandwidth allocated for NNI interfaces and 66% of the bandwidth allocated for UNI interfaces
Traffic mixture of 60% packet and 40% TDM
Figure 3 compares the cost breakdown of typical POTS versus a PTN platform. The PTN solution provides about
40% lower cost, mainly due to the very low cost of the NNI solution. In fact, almost 30% of the POTS cost is
associated with NNI interfaces. The PTN solution, with its on-board UNI/NNI interfaces and the use of one type
of NNI interface (namely Ethernet NNI), maintains a much more competitive price point.
Eth NNISDH Commons
POTS CAPEX PTN CAPEX
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
The PTN solutionprovides about 40%
lower cost, mainly dueto the very low cost
of the NNI solution
-
8/11/2019 PTN vs Dual Fabric POTS for SDH Migration 1212
5/6
Conclusions
The migration from legacy SDH to packet-based systems in the metro calls for a hybrid solution that can cost-effectivelyaddress this challenge with a single platform. The two leading candidates for this purpose are POTS with its multipurpose
switching capabilities and PTN which integrate advanced circuit emulation technology into a state-of-the-art carrier
Ethernet platform. The following table compares the key characteristics of the two technologies.
Characteristic PTN POTS
Architecture
Unified switching entity for packet and TDM- PTNpacket switching architecture forwardspackets and TDMin the same way, forming aunified switching architecture.
Two logically separated switching entities(packet plus TDM) - the multipurpose switchingfabric forms two separate switching entities ina single box.
NetworkingA unified packet network, capable oftransporting any mix of packet and TDMtrafficover 1GEand 10GEinterfaces.
Two separate networks, one for TDMand theother for Packets. Both can use the same fiberpairs by addingWDMcomponents at extracost, instead of service cards.
OAMCarrier Ethernet OAMtools including EthernetOAM (IEEE-802.1ag CFMandITU-T Y.1731).TDM OAMat TDMtermination points only.
Separate OAMapproach for Packet traffic andTDMtraffic. Carriers need to master bothtechnologies to manage their network.
NetworkManagement
PTNuses MPLS-based dynamic control planewith full routing and signaling capabilities. Thissignificantly simplifies the establishment andmanagement of all services. Use of NMSisoptional and is mostly used for GUI-basedservice management with full FCAPSsupport.
NMSin POTSis compulsory. All provisioningis static and is based on centralized pathcomputation for SDHservices and on PathComputation Element for packet services.Management of services is complex and differssignificantly from TDMto Packet.
Cost
The PTNarchitecture enables low costsolutions. With a lower entry cost, PTN
technology is extremely cost effective. This costadvantage grows as the node capacity scales.
The POTSarchitecture with its multipurposeswitching fabric imposes high system cost dueto high cost of networking interfaces.
POTS is the technology of choice for multiservice national backbones which require integration between high capacityROADM technology, packet transport and TDM transport in a single box. When attempting to use the same technology
for metro applications, however, its major disadvantages become clear. The multiservice switching technology forcesthe POTS devices to act as two separate products in one cage with TDM traffic handled completely separate from
the packet transport. Converging the two technologies by means of Ethernet over SDH simply turns the POTS intoa regular MSPP.
Furthermore, the POTS technology is very expensive both in terms of CAPEX and OPEX. POTS high entry cost ismostly driven by the need for expensive NNI interfaces. The cost of expansion cards is also high due to the complexswitching architecture and the need to convert any traffic to cells. In terms of OPEX, operators are actually runningtwo networks in one box. This means that network operators are running a TDM network in parallel with a packetnetwork and, in some cases, even with a WDM layer for fiber relief.
PTN solution, on the other hand, is designed and optimized for metro applications. Its unified packet switching keepsthe system cost at a very low price point and the OPEX is kept low with a single transport approach. The selection of
MPLS and MPLS-TP as the underlying transport technologies, introduces state-ofthe-art control plane into the packettransport t world, providing simple operation with assured SLA.
Therefore, it is clear that the optimal solution for next generation transport networks, which are capable of convergingTDM with packet technologies, is PTN.
The optimal solution for nextgeneration transport networks,which are capable of converging
TDM with packet technologies is PTN
-
8/11/2019 PTN vs Dual Fabric POTS for SDH Migration 1212
6/6
Orckit facilitates telecommunication providers delivery of highcapacity broadband residential, business and mobile servicesover wireline or wireless networks with its Orckit-Corrigentfamily of products. With 20 years of field experience with Tier-1customers located around the world and sound leadership,
Orckit has a firm foothold in the ever-developing world oftelecommunication.
Orckit-Corrigents product portfolio includes Packet TransportNetwork (PTN) switches - an MPLS and MPLS-TP dual stackbased portfolio enabling advanced packet as well as legacyservices over packet networks with a wide set of transportfeatures.
Orckit-Corrigent markets its products directly and indirectlythrough strategic alliances, as well as distribution and resellerpartners worldwide.
Orckit was founded in 1990 and went public in 1996. Thecompany is active in APAC, Western and Eastern Europe,and America.
For more information please visit www.orckit.com.
Pushing technology to the edge
www.orck it. com
2011 Orckit-Corrigent
Designby:2plustudio
.com