[j-nsp] [c-nsp] MPLS-TP on CPT platform vs IP/MPLS core on ASR with TE

[Mark Tinka]

On Tuesday, November 26, 2013 01:33:13 AM Yham wrote:

> If a provider already have ciena as transport with
> ip/mpls core on cisco ASR, why would they want to deploy
> CPT with mpls-tp?

Pretty much every optical vendor today is implementing MPLS-
TP in their platforms, as a way to gain a share of the 
"packet space".

Our side is also not standing still - the vendors have been 
plugging DWDM ports into routers for a while now. The model 
hasn't been successful (you can see how IPoDWDM was a total 
disaster), but Cisco and Juniper are trying again. Cisco 
with the NCS, and Juniper with the PTX.

So optical and routing vendors are trying to bite into each 
others' space.

Some optical vendors are implementing MPLS-TP, while others 
are even considering adding full MPLS switching capability 
in their optical gear. The whole thing smells funny to me 
(can my favorite optical vendor support p2mp LSP tunnels in 
their device?).

At any rate, I never liked MPLS-TP because:

	1. It doesn't support ECMP.

	2. It is static (although some implementations offer
	   easier provisioning via an NMS).

	3. It's not dynamic enough a la MPLS in the IP
	   world.

IMHO, MPLS-TP was just the ITU trying to find a way to admit 
that Ethernet is better than SONET/SDH/TDM, but still keep 
their fan-base happy by staying with the deployment 
ideologies of old.

Not many folk I know run STM-256/OC-768 (40Gbps). For all 
intents and purposes, after STM-64/OC-192, you need to run 
Ethernet if you want to scale up (40Gbps, 100Gbps, 400Gbps, 
1Tbps, e.t.c.). I don't see the ITU trying to develop higher 
bandwidth beyond 10Gbps/40Gbps over legacy protocols. 
Ethernet has proven its case already.

There are enough tools in vanilla IP/MPLS to make it 
reliable enough for high-end data. I mean, what do you think 
IPTv runs on?

Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/juniper-nsp/attachments/20131126/2068df8b/attachment.sig>