It was determined that a website assessment would be completed.
Representatives from PennTAP and EarthNet Energy discussed their potential marketing project. At that time, Penn State’s Rick Hoover shared what services PennTAP could provide. The PennTAP ConnectionĮarthNet Energy owner, Brad McNew, attended a presentation at MANTEC in south central Pennsylvania showcasing the Penn State’s Learning Factory. To subscribe, please visit: Energy, located in Chambersburg, is a solar energy business trying to build a reputation as the go-to people for solar heating and cooling. PBT: The Empire Strikes Back, a 23-page report, is available as part of an annual subscription (12 monthly issues) to Light Reading Insider, priced at $1,595. Simon Sherrington, Analyst, Light Reading Insider It is now a matter of which side can capture the most ground. Carrier Ethernet is clearly here to stay, and Ethernet vendors have an opportunity to win significant market share. However, the fight for new territory will be fierce, and MPLS vendors will not be the sole overlords of the metro transport network. MPLS is entrenched in core networks, and it is not going to be displaced there for a long time to come.
MPLS vendors are not exactly fighting a rear-guard action. Their aim? To convince experienced routing engineers not to defect to the Ethernet side, and to convince Sonet/SDH engineers that they need to enter the world of MPLS routing. Some have developed a slimmer version of MPLS (in the form of T-MPLS). They have worked to closely associate MPLS QOS capabilities with the needs of a heavily loaded IPTV network. They are working to improve cost-effectiveness. They are offering new technology developments designed to streamline MPLS-based technology and how it can be used. And their promises have found ears: Some large carriers have signed contracts for equipment, and others are understood to be very curious.īut the MPLS vendors have not given up the fight indeed, their counter-initiatives are well underway, as documented in our report. They have promised simplicity, carrier-grade capability, and low cost. Instead, they have positioned carrier Ethernet, augmented by PBB and connection-oriented PBB-TE, for the application. The carrier Ethernet camp contends that MPLS is too complex, too expensive, and too clunky for the metro environment. (Nasdaq: CSCO), and Juniper Networks Inc. Carrier Ethernet vendors have challenged the authority and go-to-market strategies of entrenched suppliers selling IP/MPLS, including Alcatel-Lucent (NYSE: ALU), Cisco Systems Inc.
MPLS was the only technology that could meet the complex requirements of the metro and aggregation transport network environment and the multiplicity of broadband-enabled services being developed.īut a funny thing happened on the way to total domination: the stunning emergence of carrier Ethernet in metro networks. Firmly established as the dominant transport protocol in the network core, MPLS seemed well on its way to extending its reach into metro networks, and possibly even into access pipes all the way to the desktop. The report also looks at which of the three different transport networking approaches leading router and switch vendors recommend, and at the latest trends in the development of MPLS technology and the equipment using it.Ī year or so ago, few thought MPLS would have any competition in metro transport. It polls vendors' views about how close to the customer MPLS should be pushed and discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the technology. PBT: The Empire Strikes Back" takes a close look at MPLS technology and its potential future role in metro transport networking. And, as the latest edition of Light Reading Insider shows, MPLS may be losing this critical metro battle. At stake is a high-growth market emerging from the requirement to deliver high-quality services over an efficient, converged packet network infrastructure. Telecom equipment makers are urgently trying to convince potential customers to show their metro transport allegiance by committing to one of three technologies: MPLS provider backbone transport (PBT) in the guise of provider backbone bridging (PBB) and traffic-engineered PBB (PBB-TE) or Transport MPLS (T-MPLS). What once looked like a walkover in the metro network sector has turned into a pitched battle – to the surprise, but not the delight, of those who saw Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) as the clear and obvious choice for metro transport.
0 kommentar(er)
