On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 06:37:36PM +0100, Rod Beck wrote:
Hi Richard,
I never said that protected LAN PHY 10 GigE was more expensive than two diversely routed waves.
Strange, the e-mail from you that I quoted specifically said:
Bottom line is that it will cost more than two diversely routed 10 gig waves.
But at any rate...
However, Hibernia's engineers have advised that route protected LAN PHY 10 GigE will tolerate a relatively high BER before switching. I stand by that statement.
I said that protected STM64 service was more expensive and that is true. Not only do you need two diversely STM64 waves, but you need protection as well.
Modern DWDM systems don't care about they content of the payload, they use a system called OTN (optical transport networks) as a generic digital wrapper around the payload, and then they deal entirely with the OTN frame. This makes features like optical protection protocol agnostic, and remove any kind of cost difference based on the type of service. I think you're confusing the old style system of implementing a SONET/SDH based ring as a method of delivering protected services, with the modern techniques of delivering 10G or other subrate services as LAN PHY or SONET/SDH or some other protocol. These are completely different things.
I have sold almost 30 ten gig waves (leases) and I have only received one request (global bank) for protected service. When I priced at the twice the price of an unprotected service plus a 10% premium, that request was downsized to a protected STM16.
Well, I DID point out some compelling reasons why one might want to do 2x (or more) diversely routed unprotected wavelengths rather than a protected service. There are many other reasons, such as statistically multiplexed oversubscribtion on multiple unprotected circuits during the normal non-failure state. At any rate, I'm not in a position to explain the logic or motivations of the people who buy waves from you, all I can tell you is how the technology works and what it costs to deploy it. As such, my previous explanation was correct. :)
Customers in general are simply not willing to pay for protection. Indeed, most of them prefer to load balance among diversely routed 10 gig waves or buy waves on several network or cable systems.
All perfectly legitimate reasons why one might want to do multiple diverse unprotected wavelengths, but this is still orthogonal to the assertions that protected wavelengths are not possible, not reliable, or cost more to implement than 2x unprotected waves. Also, keep in mind that the availability of > 2-degree protection on modern DWDM platforms could *easily* result in optically protected wavelengths which are much cheaper to deliver than diversely routed unprotected paths. For example, lets consider the scenerio you previously gave of a 10G wavelength from Chicago to Frankfurt. Using an optical switching protection system, a provider could survive a fiber cut between Chicago and Cleveland in Detroit by wrapping the wavelengths via Chicago Indianapolis Cincinatti Cleveland, before continuing on its way to Frankfurt. This eliminates the need to provision capacity on two completely diverse paths, which may not even exist or which may have extremely poor latency choices, and reduces the cost to deliver the service. As always, the benefits of such a system depend on both the carrier's and the customers' footprints. I suspect you'll start to see more of this in the future, as Level3 seems to be adopting it. -- Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)