Copper for Ethernet Access to VPLS and MPLS Networks

Ethernet access does not require fiber.  But this technology offers excellent scalability for VPLS and MPLS network access.

For the full year 2012, the global Ethernet access device (EAD) market grew 3.5 per cent, to $860 million, with growth slowing as a result of the economy and a drop in carrier spending.

“People keep saying that copper’s dead, but it’s not-it. It has a limited but important role for Ethernet services, as evidenced by the continued growth of using bonded copper for Ethernet in the last mile,” notes Michael Howard, principal analyst for carrier networks and co-founder of Infonetics Research. “High capacities and reach where fiber in unavailable make it a useful and effective alternative where fiber isn’t justified.”

“We expect operators to spend a cumulative $1.5 billion on EFM bonded copper EADs over the next five years (out of a cumulative $5.8 billion total for all EADs) as they increase the capacity and efficiency of mobile backhaul networks and business connections,” Continues Howard.

10/100M copper and 1G fiber dominate EAD ports today, however, 10G fiber is growing fast, forecast by Infonetics to grow at a 117 per cent CAGR through 2017. Though in slow decline, Ethernet over TDM (EoTDM) bonded circuits will remain a niche market, providing an inexpensive way to combine several E1s or T1s.

If you are thinking of obtaining a new wide area network, consider Ethernet access loops as a cost-effective and scalable access medium.

Bursting on an MPLS or VPLS Network

Global Ethernet VPLSA handful of carriers support bursting on their IP-VPN networks.

Bursting can provide a real cost savings benefit to customers. First, it’s a solution for customers who don’t how much bandwidth they need at a given location. Bursting lets these customers add locations to their network at the lowest level of cost commitment.

Second, it is an ideal solution for customers who know that their bandwidth needs may spike much higher than normal due to, for example, seasonal traffic peaks. Bursting lets these customers commit to the least amount of bandwidth they need for continued use and pay for only what they use in excess of that amount.

Here’s an example of how it works:

A customer commits to 100 Mbps of bandwidth at a location. The carrier sets up their IP VPN port to handle bursting. That location can now burst traffic all the way up to 1 Gbps, or whatever their local loop capacity is. For instance, you might pay for a 100M Ethernet local loop, but pay for a committed port of 20M.  This will allow you to burst to the full 100M when the need arises.

The carrier then samples traffic leaving the port throughout the month. At the end of the month, billing is calculated for the:

  • 100M local loop
  • Committed 20 Mbps port rate; plus the,
  • Sustained traffic rate in excess of the committed rate.

The carrier typically discards the top 5% of the traffic samples taken during the month. This eliminates any spurious or unusual traffic from the billing measurement.

If customers find that their sustained traffic is significantly higher than their committed data rate (in this case, 20 Mbps), they can increase their commitment and take advantage of lower prices at higher committed sustained data rates.

If you are considering changes to your Wide Area Network and would like some specialized assistance with the process, please contact us!

MPLS spec introduced for cellular back-haul network service

For anyone performing cellular back-haul, there’s a new specification for handling wireless data traffic from a combination of traditional TDM networks and packet-based transport technologies as wireless operators migrate from 2G/3G to 4G and LTE services.

The Broadband Forum has just issued its “Technical Specification for MPLS in Mobile Backhaul Networks,” also known as TR-221.

TR-221 focuses on the applications of MPLS technology in a range of services that may be used to transport wireless traffic in the access and aggregation networks, including IP, TDM, ATM and Ethernet.

It defines the global requirements of MPLS technology in these networks in respect of encapsulation, signalling and routing, QoS, OAM, resiliency, security, and synchronization. It also covers expected services over the back-haul network, including voice, multimedia services, data traffic and multicast traffic, such as multimedia broadcast and multicast services (MBMS).

Adherence to these requirements will create global standards for MPLS-oriented equipment, establishing more network interoperability, speeding deployments and lowering the overall costs of the backhaul network, the Broadband Forum said.

Defining a range of reference architectures for MPLS-based mobile backhaul networks, TR-221 includes specifications for the various transport scenarios applicable to all mobile networks (2G, 3G and LTE). It also specifies the equipment requirements for the control, user and management planes to provide unified and consistent end-to-end transport services for mobile backhaul.

Robin Mersh, CEO of the Broadband Forum, said: “TR-221 is a critical part of establishing multi-vendor interoperability in converged MPLS-based backhaul networks. As mobile operators look to preserve their investment in traditional TDM and ATM networks whilst developing their 4G/LTE architectures, TR-221 will enable them to integrate new packet-based MPLS technologies into their established networks. Operators will be able to evolve their networks to be faster and more efficient to meet the increasing multimedia needs of the mobile user, whilst preserving a lower cost per bit in the backhaul network.”

WAN using IP VPN over Internet versus MPLS – Pros and Cons

There’s a price for everything in this world, and  Internet based IP VPNs are no exception. While  IP VPNs are a cheaper alternative to any MPLS network, it doesn’t necessarily mean they’re for everyone, as customer requirements always vary. In this posting, I will explain both the Internet IP VPN advantages and disadvantages.

Let’s take a look at a few IP VPN advantages over most MPLS circuits:

  • Cheaper rates. Internet service providers provide a simple NxT1, Ethernet or Cable connection to the Internet, using the highest possible speed with. The price for internet connectivityis considerably cheaper than almost any WAN MPLS service, making it extremely attractive for companies seeking to cut telecom costs.
  • Fully configurable. WAN engineers have total control over the VPN tunnel created between sites. They are able to perform on-the-fly configuration changes to compensate for any network problems or help rectify any problem that might arise. With full access to the VPN, terminating equipment like routers and firewalls, engineers have the ability to see the condition of the internet circuit and take any action(s) deemed necessary…provided they have the staff resources and skills.
  • VPN backup included. For mission-critical sites, backup via another internet circuit is possible if your primary connection fails.  Time response for the backup line to come online is configurable by the network engineer, and there is no need to wait for the ISP to fix a line so your company can continue working.
  • Two-in-one. When configuring the site-to-site VPN, engineers can also configure remote VPN access for users traveling around the country or world, a feature most companies would have to pay additional money for to receive from their service providers.
  • Upgradable features. Perhaps one of the strongest advantages is the fact that your site-to-site VPN characteristics are strictly dependant on those that your VPN routers/firewall support. This means that as new features are introduced with the newer router operating systems (i.e., Cisco IOS), they will be available to your engineers to implement. For example, QoS pre-classification was a feature Cisco introduced in its IOS that fixed a number of QoS features for different services running over VPN tunnels. Dynamic Multiple VPN (DMVPN) was another great feature allowing scalable IPsec VPN tunnels between multiple sites. DMVPN allows every endpoint to dynamically build a VPN tunnel with any of its other peers, providing a low-cost mesh VPN solution.

If the brief list of the above  of Internet IP VPN advantages seems overwhelming , you have read a few of its disadvantages.

Here is a list of a few disadvantages of Internet IP VPNs over almost all WAN MPLS circuits:

  • Limited QoS. In order to have a fully functional QoS model, you need to have control of all equipment and paths that your VPN packets run through. In the Internet IP VPN model, QoS is effective in each site’s LAN, up until the L interface of the routers. From there on, packets enter the ISP’s network, and your ISP will clearly state that there is no QoS for such connections. Everything is based on a “best effort” delivery mechanism and you can’t argue about that. Any QoS parameters inserted in your WAN packets are, in most cases, ignored by the ISP.
  • No Class of Service Prioritization. It’s the internet, sorry.
  • Higher Packet Loss and Latency. If you use interactive applications, video, voice domestically or are connecting to locations more than 3,000 miles away, the MPLS network will outperform the IP VPN hands down.
  • Undependable voice and video. If you use voice or video over your network, the MPLS network will outperform the IP VPN, hands down with dependable and consistent performace.
  • Possible bottlenecks and low speeds. In an Internet IP VPN scenario, your company connects to the Internet, which has quite a variation of performance.  If there is heavy traffic on the Internet, chances are you might experience lower speeds during peak-hour times. Again, there is no guarantee of the performance.
  • VPN and router/firewall security. You are exposed directly to the Internet. This means that the security of your VPN and terminating equipment (routers and/or firewalls) are your responsibility. If your engineers do not take the necessary measures to secure the equipment correctly, this can lead to the exposure of your company to the Internet. This is not a topic to be taken lightly, as the damage can be devastating. It is extremely important to understand the risk involved and to have the required technical expertise to ensure the job is performed correctly. Under ideal circumstances, where the equipment is correctly configured, there is no need to worry—you’re safe.
  • Denial of service attacks. With a direct Internet connection, you are exposed to any denial of service (DoS) attack. All attempts can be successfully repelled; however, keep in mind that the traffic will have to reach your router/firewall first. This means that the heaviest damage that can be produced by a DoS attack—for a correctly configured endpoint—is to create a bottleneck on your connection and greatly reduce speeds for the duration of the attack.

If you want a rock-solid WAN with almost no packet loss and the lowest possible latency and quality, consider an MPLS network.

Global Ethernet VPN Still Limited in Many Geographies

Enterprise customers around the world are replacing legacy private line, Frame Relay, and ATM wide area networks (WAN) with Ethernet VPLS and MPLS IP VPN services. Companies’ choice of wide-area network type is shaped by a number of factors, including the applications they need to accommodate, the number of locations to be connected, the level of control the customers want to maintain over their networks, their capacity requirements, and the cost of the solution. However, data from TeleGeography’s Global Enterprise Networks Research Service suggest that the most important factor shaping an organization’s international network choice may simply be availability.

Ethernet VPN services are generally more cost effective than MPLS IP VPN services for capacity requirements above 50 Mbps, and are most appropriate for linking high-capacity headquarter sites and data centers. MPLS IP VPN
services tend to be better suited for linking large numbers of sites with more modest capacity requirements. However, dependence on Ethernet local access and the relatively slow rollout of Ethernet across MPLS PoPs means that Ethernet VPN solutions are not yet available in as many cities.

Ethernet deployments lag far behind MPLS VPN deployments, both by service provider and by geographic market. Over half of the 63 international service providers researched by TeleGeography offer MPLS VPN service in 10 or more countries, compared with less than one-third of Ethernet VPLS service providers.

The availability of IP VPN and Ethernet VPN services also differs by region. TeleGeography identified 39 IP VPN providers in Europe, 34 in Asia, 31 in the U.S. & Canada, and 19 in Africa and Latin American. Ethernet VPN services are less widely available in all of these regions, but the difference is particularly great in emerging markets. While 32 service providers offer layer 2 Ethernet VPN services in Europe, only 9 offer VPLS service in Latin America
and only 6 in Africa. While 22 service providers offer VPLS service in London, only 5 offer VPLS service in Mumbai.

This report should not limit your interest in Ethernet VPN services, but rather shape expectations on its availability.  To determine Ethernet VPN network availability for your company, contact us.

The above content provided from TeleGeography, the world’s leading independent reference source for global network infrastructure data.

Cisco Router Performance by Model

It’s often a challenge to find clear comparisons of Cisco router performance, so I’ve decided to display this information in our blog.  Juniper, Adtran and HP make fine routers.  But Cisco leads the pack.
Note that the chart displays the following:
  • Switching performance in packets per second
  • 64 byte packet size, IP only
  • These are test numbers that will decline significantly if you add ACLs, encryption, compression, etc.
Router Performance Matrix
Process SwitchingProcess SwitchingFast/CEF SwitchingFast/CEF Switching
Platform
PPSMbpsPPSMbps
14xx6000.30724,0002.05
160x(-R)6000.30724,0002.05
17011,7000.870412,0006.14
17101,3000.66567,0003.58
1711-17121,7000.870413,5006.91
17201,4000.71688,5004.35
17211,7000.870412,0006.14
17501,4000.71688,5004.35
17511,5000.76812,0006.14
17601,7000.870416,0008.19
1801-181270,00035.84
184175,00038.4
1861146,14274.82
1941299,000153.08
25008000.40964,4002.25
261x1,5000.76815,0007.68
262x1,5000.76830,00015.36
265x2,0001.02440,00020.48
26917,4003.788870,00035.84
28013,0001.53690,00046.08
28113,0001.536120,00061.44
282111,5005.888170,00087.04
285115,0007.68220,000112.64
36202,0001.02420,000-40,00010-20
2901327,000167.42
2911353,000180.73
2921480,000245.76
2951580,000296.96
36404,0002.04850-70,00025.6-36
366012,0006.144100-120,00051.2-61.4
36314,0002.04850-70,00025.6-36
3725100-120,00051.2-61.4
3745225-250,00025.6-36
38102,0001.0248,0004.10
3810-V33,0001.53615,0007.68
382525,00012.8350,000179.20
384535,00017.92500,000256.0
3925833,000426.49
3945982,000502.78
40001,8000.921614,0007.17
712013,0006.656175,00089.60
714020,00010.24300,000153.60
7200-NPE1007,0003.584100,00051.20
7200-NPE15010,0005.12150,00076.80
7200-NPE1759,0004.608177,84891.06
7200-NPE20013,0006.656200,000102.40
7200-NPE22513,0006.656233,170119.38
7200-NPE30020,00010.24353,000180.74
7300-NSE-1003,500,000(PXF)1,792
7600-MSFC220,00010.2430,000,0001,792
ASR1000-PRE410,000,0005,120
12000(Engine 6)50,000,00020,000
CRS-1 LC80,000,00040,960
1 “Punts to RSP” means that when a VIP cannot process the packets in a distributed manner (for instance, when doing MLPPP across different PA’s instead of keeping the bundles on the same PA), it must push that forwarding decision and packet flow to the RSP. In these cases, use the RSP switching numbers.
2 The 7600 only slows centralized forwarding when a classic line card is installed, and then only for flows that must be centrally forwarded. For instance, a system with a Sup720 with two 6748
DFC3A equipped cards has a legacy gigabit switching module installed – the 6148-GE-TX, for instance. Flows going to or originating from that card operate at 15Mpps, but flows going between the 6748′s operate at full 48Mpps per slot. Therefore, distributed forwarding is unaffected by the insertion of a legacy card.
All contents are Copyright © 1992–2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. This document is Cisco Public Information.

Troubleshooting MPLS Network Performance Issues

Are you having performance issues on your MPLS network? Does the carrier tell you that everything is OK on their end?  That the problem is on your internal network?  The fact is, troubleshooting these performance issues is complicated.  Our engineers are very good at this process, having worked both on the carrier and enterprise environments.

Troubleshooting your problem requires access to your network.  So the steps are:

  • Obtain access to  your network via a VPN
  • Run tests
  • Collect results

This sounds easy… but it is definitely not.

The time required for testing process will depend on how intermittent the performance issue is.

Then we’ll be able to do one of two things:

  1. fix the problem
  2. demonstrate in a provable way that the problem is in the provider’s infrastructure

If you have a network performance issue and need a third party analysis of the problem, please contact MPLS-Experts.

 

 

What does Cisco SmartNet cost internationally?

When you have a global MPLS network, one decision that you need to make is whether to lease or rent routers from the carrier, or buy/lease them yourselves.  Remember, carriers will still manage your network if you own the routers.  If you want Cisco routers and decide to procure them yourselves, you need to determine what the SmartNet cost will be.  It is noteworthy that routers that are approaching their end of life have dramatically higher SmartNet costs.  For instance, compare the 1921 to the 1841.

  • Do you want 24×7 support or 8×5 support?
  • Do you want a live Cisco engineer to install the replacement router?

I found this handy web site that can help you learn all the costs: http://www.ithsc.com/ciscohardwaremaintenance/SMARTnet_calculator.php

Be sure the select the currency you want for the prices, since the default is UK Pounds Sterling.

Collocation Facilities – Location is more important than you think!

I am working with a client right now that needs a 30Mbps private network to Asia.  They have a collocation facility in the US that will connect via this circuit to a collo facility in Hong Kong.

When businesses select collo facilities, they rarely think about proximity to a telecom hotel.  Why, you ask?  Because the local loop between the carrier and the collo facility is a significant part of your network cost.  For this example, the circuit cost came in at $8,200/mo, in large part, because of the local loop cost.

If the client used a collo facility that was also a telecom hotel, the cost went down to $3,850/mo, a difference of $53,200/year! The same logic applies to selecting new office locations: consider your local loop costs.

An independent consulting firm like MPLS-Experts can help you make the right decisions so that your long term objective are considered for your business.

The importance of a Wayleave Agreement prior to installation

This posting is procedural, not technical.  It was motivated by an installation delay that was unexpected for a customer in London.

The local loop was to be installed by BT, in an office complex owned by a large national commercial property company.  For some reason, the HQ of the property owner would not agree to the Wayleave Agreement that BT required. This meant that BT would not install the local loop to the client office.  What is more surprising is that BT would install regular telephone lines to their office.  This made no sense to anyone.  But it caused an unexpected delay and needless aggravation.  So I want to make all my readers aware of this, so they can confirm with their landlords that a Wayleave Agreement is in place with the local phone company.  This is of particular importance in the UK and India.  In China, payment of bribes to the building management is not an unusual way to manage this situation.

For clarity, a Wayleave Agreement is an agreement under which a property owner gives a service provider (for example, an electricity, telephone or cable TV services provider) a right to install pipe or cable passing through or over the owner’s property.

Check with your landlord that such an agreement is in place to avoid any delays in your network installation.