Subject: Re: Are people still building SONET networks from scratch? Date: Sun, Sep 09, 2012 at 01:15:35AM -0500 Quoting Jimmy Hess (mysidia@gmail.com):
On 9/8/12, Måns Nilsson <mansaxel@besserwisser.org> wrote:
Subject: Re: Are people still building SONET networks from scratch? Date: Just the fact that BFD had to be reinvented shows that there is ample reason to prefer the steady-train-of-frames-with-status of SONET/SDH over perhaps-nobody-sent-a-packet-or-the-line-is-dead quagmire of Ethernet --
Not all Ethernet switching implementations are necessarily equal; there are 802.3ah OA&M and 802.1ag connectivity fault management / Loopback (MAC ping) / Continuity Check Protocol / Link Trace. (Which aren't much use without management software, however.)
Of course.
There /are/ reasons to prefer SONET for certain networks or applications; so it might (or might not) be a reasonable requirement, it just depends.
Yes.
Price is not one of those reasons; all the added complexity and use of less common equipment has some major costs, not to mention risks, involved if mixing many different service providers' products. SONET comes at a massive price premium per port and switching table entry on hardware modules that are much more expensive than 10g switches, and providers often charge a big premium regardless...
Yes. The 6x difference I alluded to was a comparison of line cards for OC192 and 10GE on major league routers, like CRS or T-series. Most of the bits are the same, yet the price \delta is insane.
Therefore; it is not the least bit surprising that a 10g wave would be massively less expensive in many cases than an OC3 over a long distance between point A and point B.
Especially since it might be possible to get it provisioneed e2e.
As I see it... if you are thinking of 1000 miles of dark fiber to nowhere to support an OC3, then forget the "wasted" capacity; the cost of all that dark fiber needed just for them should get added to the customer's price quote for the OC3.
Yup.
Same deal if instead you need an OC48 at various hops to actually carry that OC3 and be able to end-to-end and tunnel the DCC bytes over IP or restrict equipment choices so you can achieve that D1-12 byte transparency....
I'm a simple man. I just want the bitpipe to do IP over. It so happens that the combined engineering of the telco business made for a nice set of signalling bells and whistles that tend to work well on long point-to-point circuits. If not perfectly well, then at least orders of magnitude better than a protocol that was designed to sometimes convey frames over one nautical mile of yellow coax. Then again, the yellow coax has evolved, significantly. -- Måns Nilsson primary/secondary/besserwisser/machina MN-1334-RIPE +46 705 989668 Didn't I buy a 1951 Packard from you last March in Cairo?