Re: Routed optical networks

> On May 13, 2023, at 4:03 AM, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > > On 5/12/23 22:14, Mike Hammett wrote: > >> "I remember 10y ago every presentation started from the claim that 100B of >> IoT would drive XXX traffic. It did not happen" >> >> Often the type of people making these kinds of predictions

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/12/23 22:14, Mike Hammett wrote: "I remember 10y ago every presentation started from the claim that 100B of IoT would drive XXX traffic. It did not happen" Often the type of people making these kinds of predictions that a tire pressure sensor generates 20 gigabytes of traffic a day.

Re: Routed optical networks

ntelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com - Original Message - From: "Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG" To: "Dave Taht" Cc: "NANOG" Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2023 2:33:58 AM Subject: RE: Routed optical networks

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/12/23 15:03, Dave Taht wrote: Libreqos is free software, working as a bridge, you can plug it in between any two points on your network, and on cheap (350 bucks off of ebay) xeon gold hardware easily cracks 25Gbits while shaping with a goal of cracking 100Gbits one day soon. This is

Re: Routed optical networks

On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 7:32 AM Mark Tinka wrote: > > > > On 5/11/23 13:25, Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG wrote: > > Sandvine is not representative of global traffic because DPI is installed > mostly for Mobiles. But Mobile subscriber is 10x less than fixed on traffic – > it is not the biggest

Re: Routed optical networks

n could come at any year and add a new S-curve > (Metaverse?). But disruption is by definition not predictable. > > > > PS: Everything above and below in this thread is just my personal opinion. > > > > Eduard > > From: Etienne-Victor Depasquale [mailto:ed...@ieee.org] >

Re: Routed optical networks

arrangement – it is magic. > > PS: Everything above and below in this thread is just my personal opinion. > > Eduard > > *From:* Etienne-Victor Depasquale [mailto:ed...@ieee.org] > *Sent:* Thursday, May 11, 2023 6:03 PM > *To:* Vasilenko Eduard > *Cc:* Dave Taht ; Phil Bedard ; >

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/11/23 17:26, Jared Mauch wrote: And as I’ve seen, they continue to become a bit more divergent. As someone who has an access network I see where the majority of my bits go, which is to the content folks. There’s some to the other part, but mostly people want their MTV, but since

Re: Routed optical networks

> On May 11, 2023, at 11:11 AM, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > > On 5/11/23 15:50, Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG wrote: > >> Hi Jared, >> Could I make a conclusion from your comments: "only Carrier itself >> understand the traffic - see many examples in the text". >> I would very agree to this. >

RE: Routed optical networks

; NANOG Subject: Re: Routed optical networks Eduard, you know the answer as well as I do, right :) ? Here's my answer: I think that Cisco can only estimate (let's not say speculate, it has pretty bad connotations) what comes out of access networks. No offence meant, I hope none is taken. Cheers

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/11/23 15:50, Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG wrote: Hi Jared, Could I make a conclusion from your comments: "only Carrier itself understand the traffic - see many examples in the text". I would very agree to this. I wouldn't say only carriers understand the traffic as much as I would

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/11/23 14:15, Jared Mauch wrote We have seen a continued trend of the privatization of traffic and localization of that over time. CDN's, submarine cables and exchange points are decentralizing the "core of the Internet", and relegating IP Transit providers to whom CDN's subscribe as

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/11/23 15:50, Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG wrote: Hi Jared, Could I make a conclusion from your comments: "only Carrier itself understand the traffic - see many examples in the text". I would very agree to this. I wouldn't say only carriers understand the traffic as much as I would say

Re: Routed optical networks

t; > Eduard > > *From:* Etienne-Victor Depasquale [mailto:ed...@ieee.org] > *Sent:* Thursday, May 11, 2023 2:46 PM > *To:* Vasilenko Eduard > *Cc:* Dave Taht ; Phil Bedard ; > NANOG > *Subject:* Re: Routed optical networks > > > > To clarify the table I linke

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/11/23 13:25, Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG wrote: Sandvine is not representative of global traffic because DPI is installed mostly for Mobiles. But Mobile subscriber is 10x less than fixed on traffic – it is not the biggest source. Moreover, Mobiles would look better growing because the

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/11/23 09:33, Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG wrote: But it is speculation, not a trend yet. I remember 10y ago every presentation started from the claim that 100B of IoT would drive XXX traffic. It did not happen. Now we see presentations that AI would be talking to AI that generates

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/11/23 13:45, Etienne-Victor Depasquale via NANOG wrote: To clarify the table I linked to in the previous email: Cisco estimates IP traffic exchanged over the access network by both businesses and consumers with: • endpoints over managed networks and • endpoints over unmanaged

RE: Routed optical networks

o: Etienne-Victor Depasquale Cc: Vasilenko Eduard ; NANOG Subject: Re: Routed optical networks > On May 11, 2023, at 7:45 AM, Etienne-Victor Depasquale via NANOG > wrote: > > To clarify the table I linked to in the previous email: > > Cisco estimates IP traffic exchanged ove

RE: Routed optical networks

Bedard ; NANOG Subject: Re: Routed optical networks To clarify the table I linked to in the previous email: Cisco estimates IP traffic exchanged over the access network by both businesses and consumers with: • endpoints over managed networks and • endpoints over unmanaged networks (“Internet

Re: Routed optical networks

> On May 11, 2023, at 7:45 AM, Etienne-Victor Depasquale via NANOG > wrote: > > To clarify the table I linked to in the previous email: > > Cisco estimates IP traffic exchanged over the access network by both > businesses and consumers with: > > • endpoints over managed networks and > •

Re: Routed optical networks

sruption could come at any year and add a new S-curve >> (Metaverse?). But disruption is by definition not predictable. >> >> >> >> PS: Everything above and below in this thread is just my personal opinion. >> >> >> >> Eduard >> >> *

Re: Routed optical networks

course, the disruption could come at any year and add a new S-curve > (Metaverse?). But disruption is by definition not predictable. > > > > PS: Everything above and below in this thread is just my personal opinion. > > > > Eduard > > *From:* Etienne-Victor Depasqual

RE: Routed optical networks

and below in this thread is just my personal opinion. Eduard From: Etienne-Victor Depasquale [mailto:ed...@ieee.org] Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2023 12:48 PM To: Vasilenko Eduard Cc: Dave Taht ; Phil Bedard ; NANOG Subject: Re: Routed optical networks Eduard, academics cite the VNI

Re: Routed optical networks

it > depends just on the marketing budget. > > > > Eduard > > *From:* Dave Taht [mailto:dave.t...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 9, 2023 11:41 PM > *To:* Vasilenko Eduard > *Cc:* Phil Bedard ; Etienne-Victor Depasquale < > ed...@ieee.org>; NANOG > *

RE: Routed optical networks

To: Vasilenko Eduard Cc: Phil Bedard ; Etienne-Victor Depasquale ; NANOG Subject: Re: Routed optical networks Up until this moment I was feeling that my take on the decline of traffic growth was somewhat isolated, in that I have long felt that we are nearing the top of the S curve of the data we

Re: Routed optical networks

some point. >> >> I hope it would happen after we would get our 22h/4k/12bit/120hz. >> >> >> >> Now, you could argue that Metaverse would jump and multiply traffic by an >> additional 2x or 3x. Then 400GE may be needed. >> >> Sorry, but it is specul

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/9/23 20:37, Phil Bedard wrote: [phil] These are already available today and have been for some time and in use in production networks for over a year now.  This is with 400G links running up to 600km in routers with QDD ports.  400G-16QAM using 60Gbaud (the OpenZR+ standard) can reach

Re: Routed optical networks

nal 2x or 3x. Then 400GE may be needed. > > Sorry, but it is speculation yet. It is not a trend like the current > (declining) traffic growth. > > > > Ed/ > > *From:* NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces+vasilenko.eduard=huawei@nanog.org] > *On Behalf Of *Phil Bedard > *Sent:* Th

Re: Routed optical networks

From: Mark Tinka Date: Tuesday, May 9, 2023 at 2:03 AM To: Phil Bedard , nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Routed optical networks On 5/8/23 21:53, Phil Bedard wrote: There are quite a few QDD pluggables in production today capable of supporting 100G signals over 1000s of km or 400G near

Re: Routed optical networks

tion and the network. > > > > Phil > > > > *From: *NANOG on behalf > of Mark Tinka > *Date: *Friday, May 5, 2023 at 12:55 AM > *To: *nanog@nanog.org > *Subject: *Re: Routed optical networks > > > > On 5/4/23 19:32, Phil Bedard wrote: > > >

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/8/23 21:53, Phil Bedard wrote: I guess let’s not confuse two things.  The optical network is made up of the photonic portion and then the transponder/muxponder portion.   A single term like “DWDM” can be confusing since it can refer to both. Indeed. I am short-handing to mean DWDM

Re: Routed optical networks

From: NANOG on behalf of Mark Tinka Date: Friday, May 5, 2023 at 12:55 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Routed optical networks On 5/4/23 19:32, Phil Bedard wrote: It’s my personal opinion we aren’t to the days yet of where we can simply build an all packet network with no photonic

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/5/23 15:50, Mike Hammett wrote: Anyone publicly traded doesn't plan longer than the current quarter. A phenomenon not unique to them - private companies suffer the same issue. Mark.

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/5/23 19:02, Jared Brown wrote: You can get 100G optics for less than half those prices. For reference, here are publicly listed prices for optics from an European vendor I have in production: 100G 4WDM & CLR4 QSFP28 * 10 km * 225€ 100GBASE-LR4 & OTU4 & 128GFC QSFP28 * 20km *305€

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/5/23 15:49, Mike Hammett wrote: Incumbents are great at momentum. They're not great at innovation, customer experience, etc. They only reason most incumbents are still relevant is due to their prior market size. Most true, and even then, there is a visible change to the bottom line

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/5/23 13:04, Vasilenko Eduard wrote: Hi Mark, Thanks a lot for many of your valuable comments I almost always agree. 1.I agree that 50GE has not got the same popularity as 100GE. Many vendors did ignore it for some time. Looks like not many ignore it now. 2.Even in your example for

Re: Routed optical networks

> On May 2, 2023, at 5:11 PM, Etienne-Victor Depasquale wrote: > > I’ve seen proposals for an LSR MPLS/ROADAM type solution, where imagine you > are at a hop where in a long distance system solution, you would end up with > OEO, but instead you get directionality capability with an IP/MPLS

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/5/23, Mark Tinka wrote: > Juxtapose that against 100Gbps pricing: > > * EUR473 @ 10km. > * EUR1,300 @ 25km. > * EUR1,500 @ 30km. > * EUR2,600 @ 40km. > * EUR3,925 @ 80km. You can get 100G optics for less than half those prices. For reference, here are publicly listed prices for optics

RE: Routed optical networks

, 2023 4:50 PM To: Vasilenko Eduard Cc: Mark Tinka ; nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Routed optical networks Incumbents are great at momentum. They're not great at innovation, customer experience, etc. They only reason most incumbents are still relevant is due to their prior market size. Around here

Re: Routed optical networks

M Subject: Re: Routed optical networks On 5/4/23 12:58, Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG wrote: > Well, ISP is typically plan something for a year. It is more than enough for > both. The real world is much less certain, especially in these economic times. > Funny, that with the

Re: Routed optical networks

m: Mark Tinka [mailto:mark@tinka.africa] Sent: Wednesday, May 3, 2023 11:39 AM To: Vasilenko Eduard ; nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Routed optical networks On 5/3/23 08:20, Vasilenko Eduard wrote: I would risk to say a little more on this. Indeed, maybe the situation (in many countries) wh

RE: Routed optical networks

tenders. Eduard From: Mark Tinka [mailto:mark@tinka.africa] Sent: Friday, May 5, 2023 1:17 PM To: Vasilenko Eduard ; nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Routed optical networks On 5/5/23 10:54, Vasilenko Eduard wrote: 50GE is better just because it is half of the cost of 100GE and it is enough now

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/5/23 10:54, Vasilenko Eduard wrote: 50GE is better just because it is half of the cost of 100GE and it is enough now for the great majority of cases. Money is very important these days for this industry. 100GE single mode is more expensive than the best router port itself. Routers have

RE: Routed optical networks

Of Mark Tinka Sent: Friday, May 5, 2023 11:13 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Routed optical networks On 5/5/23 07:57, Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG wrote: Disclaimer: Metaverse has not changed Metro traffic yet. Then … I am puzzled when people talk about 400GE and Tbps in the Mero context

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/5/23 07:57, Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG wrote: Disclaimer: Metaverse has not changed Metro traffic yet. Then … I am puzzled when people talk about 400GE and Tbps in the Mero context. For historical reasons, Metro is still about 2*2*10GE (one “2” for redundancy, another “2” for

RE: Routed optical networks

end like the current (declining) traffic growth. Ed/ From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces+vasilenko.eduard=huawei@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Phil Bedard Sent: Thursday, May 4, 2023 8:32 PM To: Etienne-Victor Depasquale ; NANOG Subject: Re: Routed optical networks It's not necessarily metro specifi

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/4/23 19:32, Phil Bedard wrote: It’s my personal opinion we aren’t to the days yet of where we can simply build an all packet network with no photonic switching that carries all services, but eventually (random # of years) it gets there for many networks.  There are also always going to

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/4/23 15:03, Jared Mauch wrote: I’m a bit shocked that I now need a 288F cable on some of my routes to support future expansion, but that fiber cost is still small compared to the labor. Yes, labour is generally the cost. And then way-leaves add cost in terms of time and lost

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/4/23 14:27, Vasilenko Eduard wrote: I had an experience in one big PTT. Fiber was easy in the majority of Metro places. Even faster than DWDM or router commissioning. It is just 1 PTT. Hence, an example could not be counted. Yeah - I usually tend to look at what happens in the

Re: Routed optical networks

It’s not necessarily metro specific although the metro networks could lend themselves to overall optimizations. The adoption of ZR/ZR+ IPoWDM currently somewhat corresponds with your adoption of 400G since today they require a QDD port. There are 100G QDD ports but that’s not all that

Re: Routed optical networks

> On May 4, 2023, at 6:21 AM, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > > On 5/4/23 11:40, Denis Fondras wrote: > >> >> You may also take into account the time to deliver. >> Laying fiber takes much more time than plugging a colored optic. > > Indeed - part of the expense of running new fibre is the time

Re: Routed optical networks

aster than DWDM or router commissioning. > It is just 1 PTT. Hence, an example could not be counted. > Eduard > -Original Message- > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces+vasilenko.eduard=huawei@nanog.org] On > Behalf Of Mark Tinka > Sent: Thursday, May 4, 2023 2:11 PM > To: n

RE: Routed optical networks

y project is a challenge. Not just fiber that may be cheaper for Metro than DWDM. Eduard From: Tom Beecher [mailto:beec...@beecher.cc] Sent: Thursday, May 4, 2023 3:26 PM To: Vasilenko Eduard Cc: Denis Fondras ; nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Routed optical networks Well, ISP is typically plan something f

RE: Routed optical networks

] On Behalf Of Mark Tinka Sent: Thursday, May 4, 2023 2:11 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Routed optical networks On 5/4/23 12:58, Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG wrote: > Well, ISP is typically plan something for a year. It is more than enough for > both. The real world is much less c

Re: Routed optical networks

is a temporary glitch. > > Ed/ > -Original Message- > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces+vasilenko.eduard=huawei@nanog.org] > On Behalf Of Denis Fondras > Sent: Thursday, May 4, 2023 12:41 PM > To: nanog@nanog.org > Subject: Re: Routed optical networks > > Le

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/4/23 12:58, Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG wrote: Well, ISP is typically plan something for a year. It is more than enough for both. The real world is much less certain, especially in these economic times. Funny, that with the current lead times for electronics, Fiber could be faster.

RE: Routed optical networks

@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Denis Fondras Sent: Thursday, May 4, 2023 12:41 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Routed optical networks Le Wed, May 03, 2023 at 06:20:48AM +, Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG a écrit : > > Additionally, I am sure that in many countries/Metro it is cheaper to lay

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/4/23 11:40, Denis Fondras wrote: You may also take into account the time to deliver. Laying fiber takes much more time than plugging a colored optic. Indeed - part of the expense of running new fibre is the time it takes to start making money from it. Mark.

Re: Routed optical networks

Le Wed, May 03, 2023 at 06:20:48AM +, Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG a écrit : > > Additionally, I am sure that in many countries/Metro it is cheaper to lay > down a new fiber than to provision DWDM, even if it is a pizza box. The > colored interface is still very expensive. > Of course, there

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/3/23 11:10, Vasilenko Eduard wrote: You are right. My message was pretty much geared toward incumbents. But the majority of the access/aggregation is in their possessions, isn’t it? Generally, I'd say yes. But to the OP's survey, the incumbents also have the majority

RE: Routed optical networks

May 3, 2023 11:39 AM To: Vasilenko Eduard ; nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Routed optical networks On 5/3/23 08:20, Vasilenko Eduard wrote: I would risk to say a little more on this. Indeed, maybe the situation (in many countries) when the Carrier sells a lot of TDM services. But in general, packet se

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/3/23 08:20, Vasilenko Eduard wrote: I would risk to say a little more on this. Indeed, maybe the situation (in many countries) when the Carrier sells a lot of TDM services. But in general, packet services are enough these days for many carriers/regions. There aren't enough TDM

RE: Routed optical networks

mal DWDM with an external transponder. Routers would be still in hub-spoke topology. Ed/ From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces+vasilenko.eduard=huawei@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mark Tinka Sent: Wednesday, May 3, 2023 7:09 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Routed optical networks On 5/2/23 07

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/2/23 22:28, Eve Griliches wrote: So right Jaredmagic has been in the NPU capacity increase that's driven the cost per 100G down on 1RU routers; But that has only mainly solved for speed. Features have taken a hit, especially if the operator is motivated by the costs of merchant

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/2/23 16:01, Eve Griliches wrote: Hi Etienne, Below is our (Cisco) definition of the Routed Optical Network. The goal, metro or long haul or subsea, is to reduce the number of control planes. By migration TDM traffic using CEM or PLE to the IP layer, you eliminate the OTN control plane

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/2/23 21:32, Jared Mauch wrote: I’ve seen proposals for an LSR MPLS/ROADAM type solution, where imagine you are at a hop where in a long distance system solution, you would end up with OEO, but instead you get directionality capability with an IP/MPLS capable device. My memory is

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/2/23 16:25, Izaac wrote: This is a very convoluted way of backing into the ole packet-switched vs. circuit switched decision. A fight that will never go away. There has been some compromise in recent years, with Transport-heavy customers accepting standard Ethernet services, but

Re: Routed optical networks

On 5/2/23 07:28, Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG wrote: The incumbent carrier typically has enough fiber strands to avoid any colored interfaces (that are 3x expensive compare to gray) in the Metro. Metro ring typically has 8-10 nodes (or similar). 16-20 strands of fiber were not possible to

Re: Routed optical networks

> > I’ve seen proposals for an LSR MPLS/ROADAM type solution, where imagine > you are at a hop where in a long distance system solution, you would end up > with OEO, but instead you get directionality capability with an IP/MPLS > capable device. As mentioned previously, the

Re: Routed optical networks

So right Jaredmagic has been in the NPU capacity increase that's driven the cost per 100G down on 1RU routers; and the integration of DSPs and more into QSFP-DD form factors at much lower power than expected. The standards for optical links are maturing as well, but we still have work to do on

Re: Routed optical networks

> On May 2, 2023, at 2:29 PM, Etienne-Victor Depasquale via NANOG > wrote: > > On Mon, May 01, 2023 at 02:56:47PM -0600, Matt Erculiani wrote: > > In short, the idea is that optical networks are wasteful and routers do a > > better job making more use of a network's capacity than ROADMs.

Re: Routed optical networks

Very helpful observations, Matt, thank you. How comfortably does the phrase "routed optical networks over Ethernet without ROADMs" sit with you? I mean: would you accept a limitation of "optical network" to the case of a network without optical layer switching (of the type done by add-drop

Re: Routed optical networks

Hello Eve, Thank you for weighing in; I'm eager for feedback from the field. This eagerness stems from my work, over the past two years, to form my understanding of where current- and next-gen metro area networks are heading. I need this understanding to help academics in my field of

Re: Routed optical networks

On Mon, May 01, 2023 at 02:56:47PM -0600, Matt Erculiani wrote: > In short, the idea is that optical networks are wasteful and routers do a > better job making more use of a network's capacity than ROADMs. Take the > extra router hop (or 3 or 8) versus short-cutting it with an optical > network

Re: Routed optical networks

Hi Etienne, Below is our (Cisco) definition of the Routed Optical Network. The goal, metro or long haul or subsea, is to reduce the number of control planes. By migration TDM traffic using CEM or PLE to the IP layer, you eliminate the OTN control plane and management. Eventually, when standards

Re: Routed optical networks

Josh, thank you, your remarks (and those of Matt and Eduard) are helping me to understand better. For some context, please look at this graphic that shows the results of the question

RE: Routed optical networks

Hi Etienne, It depends on who is the owner of the fiber. The incumbent carrier typically has enough fiber strands to avoid any colored interfaces (that are 3x expensive compare to gray) in the Metro. Metro ring typically has 8-10 nodes (or similar). 16-20 strands of fiber were not possible to

Re: Routed optical networks

Hi Etienne In short, the idea is that optical networks are wasteful and routers do a better job making more use of a network's capacity than ROADMs. Take the extra router hop (or 3 or 8) versus short-cutting it with an optical network because the silicon is so low-latency anyway that it hardly

Re: Routed optical networks

Maybe some clarification as to what you're asking for would help. You're mixing fiber, networks, and a MAN. Fiber is just the medium. It could be for IP switching or projecting a light show. Are you asking if there are diverse paths throughout a metro area? On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 2:30 PM