P-OTN:

Packet Optical Network Transformation

Bringing Packet and Optical together

At the turn of the century, the world was a different place. The vision for telecommunication networks seemed to be clear: an intelligent, all-IP packet network supporting multiple IP-based services delivered directly over fiber. Fast forward to today and it would appear that the vision has been achieved, at least if you look at core networks: IP over WDM is a reality and can be directly deployed using core router interface modules. Yet in metro and access networks, the rise of Carrier Ethernet and Connection-Oriented Packet Switching have challenged that vision, and now dominate network and system architectural debates. This is not just a technology debate. Carriers have legitimate concerns with regard to the manageability and operation of large packet networks. They recognize that their success to date is based on SONET/SDH transport networks, which also underlie the majority of packet networks. Transport of Ethernet directly over SONET/SDH has also proven successful. What many carriers desire is a continuation of this success in a fully packet-based context making use of the latest developments in connection-oriented Ethernet and the scalability of OTN and ROADMbased WDM networks. This is the basis for P-OTN1) or Packet Optical Transport Networks.

TPACK is focused on providing solutions that enable the transport of Ethernet data across telecommunication networks with Carrier Class quality. Ethernet over SONET/SDH and Ethernet over MPLS (including VPLS and PWE3) have proven to be the most popular methods to date.

However, with the inexorable growth in traffic, tighter integration of Ethernet with optical networks is desirable, in order to drive cost efficiencies and economy of scale. P-OTN promises to reduce capacity costs and network complexity, while improving scalability and flexibility. To better understand the driving forces and benefits of P-OTN, TPACK is providing this white paper which addresses the different approaches to P-OTN, including information on how TPACK can assist equipment vendors in capitalizing on the opportunities these technologies provide.

1) P-OTN (Packet Optical Transport Network) is the integration of packet networking technologies such as Ethernet and MPLS with optical network technologies such as WDM and ROADM. P-OTN provides the network infrastructure for NGN and supports multiple services including Carrier Ethernet. Copyright June 2008 TPACK A/S (www.tpack.com)

P-OTN:

Packet Optical Network Transformation

Infrastructure Market in Turmoil

When it comes to telecommunications, the vision for the future is undisputed: multiple next generation services based on Internet Protocol (IP) delivered over a fully packet based network. What is in contention is how to get from here to there. There are currently a multitude of technology options for carriers and vendors to choose between from extension of existing SONET/SDH networks with GFP/VCAT/LCAS to MPLS, VPLS, T-MPLS/MPLS-TP, PBB, PBB-TE, OTN etc. Amidst this turmoil, some points are becoming clear; the preferred interface is Ethernet, as it provides the best scalability from 10 Mbps to potentially 100 Gbps, while optical transport is the only economical means of meeting the current and expected growth in bandwidth demand. Hence the interest in merging packet and optical technology into a converged solution. Some commentators observe that packet optical is the hottest trend in optical networking in 2008. This white paper sets out to examine the packet optical marketplace, the market drivers and service applications that are placing new requirements on carrier networks. In turn, these new network applications place new requirements on systems and technology implementations, which are also described. In this paper, TPACK addresses the P-OTN or Packet Optical Transport Network market. That is to say, packet transport networks built upon the ITU-T's established set of OTN network standards such as G.709. P-OTNs can be built using multiple optical, Ethernet and/or MPLS network elements, including fully converged elements which Verizon, for example, has termed P-OTP or Packet Optical Transport Platform.

From this strategic perspective, P-OTN encompasses the multitude of different system descriptions that have recently appeared, including PONP2, POTS3, CET4, and others less commonly used such as OPT5. These descriptions and possible distinctions are explained later in this paper. As network and system architects work to define flexible, cost-effective and future-proof designs, it is already clear that one size of system solution will not fit all network circumstances. Indeed, mainstream industry opinion holds that further evolution and incorporation of new standards from ITU-T, IEEE and IETF will be a defining characteristic of P-OTN over the coming years. In chasing such a moving target, the risk for both network and system implementers is twofold: Freezing a design too soon means early obsolescence, wasted effort and stranded investment, since interoperability with forthcoming solutions is compromised; Jumping forwards too far by adopting prestandardised approaches, or approaches that fail to be adopted by the wider market, carries exactly the same consequences. In both scenarios, carriers cannot achieve the economy of scale they need for profitability. Whilst for system suppliers, playing a waiting game is commercial suicide in today's cut-throat market regime - thus the tightrope must be walked between advancing too quickly, and being left behind. TPACK has built its business by helping systems houses to walk this line: allowing them to push their solutions forwards while building in the flexibility required for inevitable future changes. A partner white paper SOFTSILICON for Flexible Packet Transport explores TPACK's approach and the benefits that manufacturers can gain, ensuring that they stay afloat in this time of market turmoil and packet network transition.

2) 3) 4) 5)

PONP: Packet Optical Networking Platform POTS: Packet Optical Transport System CET: Carrier Ethernet Transport OPT: Optical Packet Transport Copyright June 2008 TPACK A/S (www.tpack.com)

P-OTN:

Packet Optical Network Transformation

NGN Context: Carrier Drivers and Requirements

Carriers now operate a much greater variety of architectures, even as network convergence reshapes networks from single stovepipes (a separate network per service) to a shared infrastructure. In many cases, the transition timescale extends up to a decade. Different and changing service priorities mean that each carrier's investment decisions and network design have to be reviewed often. Underpinning this huge market dynamic is a fundamental transition towards packet-based services and networks. For many carriers, the eventual goal is an IP-transformed network, capable of efficiently supporting the array of new and future applications that are currently developed. The following list highlights the key challenges and priorities that carriers are trying to address and the areas that system vendors can focus on in their offerings. Development of a strategy for NGN evolution; Choice of architecture for future packet service development; Improvement in network efficiency, scalability and management; Support of legacy services in parallel with new service roll-out; Reduction of CapEx and OpEx, despite network transition costs.

It is obvious that when designing practical network platforms, a variety of options for functional and technology integration exists and carriers are keen to leverage convergence to lower their TCO. Converging packet and optical is an attractive proposition, especially if it can be achieved with a flexible solution that can allow a phased migration from existing transport infrastructure based on SONET/SDH to a fully packet-oriented infrastructure. Two broad integration categories can be identified: Packet Optical Transport Platforms and Converged Packet Switch/Routers (colloquially, IP-over-WDM). With IP-over-WDM, a WDM interface or transponder is provided in a router (typically), which allows a WDM link between routers. The consequence of this approach is that packet switching decisions are made at layer 3 and requires this intelligence at each packet switching point. An alternative approach is to provide a layer 2 packet interface with a separate optical transport interface. Switching can be performed at layer 2, which is often desirable from a transport perspective. This is the basis for Packet Optical Transport Network (P-OTN). In this paper, we will concentrate on P-OTN, but for those interested in an overview of IP-over-WDM, please see the Cisco whitepaper Converge IP and DWDM Layers in the Core Network.

Copyright June 2008 TPACK A/S (www.tpack.com)

P-OTN:

Packet Optical Network Transformation

NGN Development: Easing Packet Transition using P-OTN

Before defining P-OTN in more detail, it is useful to set the context for P-OTN, namely the transport network. For many with a packet background, the need for a separate transport network has been difficult to understand, but with the rise of real-time packet services, such as Voice over IP and IPTV, the need for greater control and planning of bandwidth is becoming more important leading to a greater appreciation for the role that transport networks fill. As depicted in Fig. 1, P-OTN can be seen as the natural evolution of advancements in both optical and packet transport protocols driven by transport network requirements. The classical definition of transport networks is the provision and management of network capacity where planned changes for each connection are normally separated by a long time period - typically of the order of weeks, or even years. However, transport networks must also react quickly in the event of failure, by raising alarms and instigating protection/restoration facilities within milliseconds.

Transport has historically referred to Layer 1 networks (eg. SONET/SDH or WDM technology), however the shift towards packet services means that Layer 2 now has an important role to play. Packet transport networks must enable carriers to drive the same economy of scale for NGN as they have done for legacy networks: Price/performance: achieving the lowest costper-bit transport; Service reach: providing the widest geographical footprint for customers; Multi-service: so that costs are shared across multiple lines of business; High availability: with low failure rate, fast protection and optional restoration schemes; High QoS: predictable latency, low errors and deterministic service delivery; Transparency: to handle any end-user or carrier's service unaltered;

Fig. 1: Transport Evolution 4

Copyright June 2008 TPACK A/S (www.tpack.com)

P-OTN:

Packet Optical Network Transformation

Strong security: to support any customer's data with confidence; SLAs: delivering on a carrier's promise for performance and availability. Some may question why, in a packet world, a transport network is still needed: since everything is going to be IP, all that's needed is routers, with intelligence centralised at Layer 3 and with integral IP-over-WDM ports for transport. However, on a per-bit carried capacity basis, the CapEx for routers is many times more expensive than alternatives and many carriers believe that their OpEx is also considerably higher. This drives a requirement for a separate, intelligent transport network at Layers 0/1/2 independent of Layer 3 switching/routing functionality. If L3 sophistication is not needed, then it should not be paid for.

What is Packet Optical Transport?

NG-SONET/SDH platforms have served carriers well in the early days of packet transition since the turn of the new century. However, their limitations are becoming more noticeable as capacities increase and the traffic mix changes. For example, Ethernet functionality is typically limited to cards within a shelf and the number of ports per card is limited. The Ethernet switching capacity may be limited by available EoSONET/SDH ASICS to a maximum of 20-40 Gbit/s. More complex distributed L2 switching architectures may be difficult to implement. Further, an increase in switching capacity is needed for increasing data traffic and higher density Ethernet cards are also required. In addition, new connection-oriented packet services such as PBB/PBB-TE and T-MPLS/MPLS-TP will need to be supported, capable of interoperating with other packet platforms. In other words, a new architectural approach is needed: P-OTN.

Copyright June 2008 TPACK A/S (www.tpack.com)

P-OTN:

Packet Optical Network Transformation

P-OTN: Evolution and Architecture Inside the Box

In the late 1990's, a digital wrapper was conceived by Lucent, which introduced a channel management mechanism, forward error correction and a multiplexing hierarchy into the WDM technology that had exploded into the marketplace. After standardisation by more industry players at ITU-T, this became formalised as the OTN and specified in several standards, most notably G.709. OTN concepts, and its associated OTH multiplex, have over time become adopted throughout the industry. Today, the majority of long-haul and metro WDM systems use OTN framing and management on their optical ports. Some vendors have introduced ODU switches that are able to cross-connect OTH payloads between ports without breaking them down into their constituent parts (eg. an SONET/SDH client or an Ethernet client). The evolution of OTN systems can be illustrated in Fig. 2 in 3 phases (simplified protocol stack on the left, example equipment design on the right):

Phase 1 (2000-2003) - SONET/SDH + OTN: OTN served as the static WDM layer used to multiply fibre capacity. The principal SONET/SDH client was TDM, although Ethernet-over-SONET/SDH was beginning to increase in importance. Phase 2 (2003-2007) - OTN + Ethernet: SONET/SDH was still an important client, but GbE private lines developed to become a significant driver of deployment, together with some 10GbE. Lower capacity EoSONET/SDH private line services are also a significant new service on a flexible OTN layer. Phase 3 (2007 onwards) - P-OTN. With the introduction of L2 switching capability, packet and TDM services have become of equal importance. Ethernet is no longer bound to SONET/SDH as a client, but is carried directly by the OTH, after packet processing, aggregation, etc. ROADMs enable the OTN to be dynamically re-configured.

Copyright June 2008 TPACK A/S (www.tpack.com)

P-OTN:

Packet Optical Network Transformation

Fig. 2: Evolution of OTN protocol stack and equipment architecture (simplified). Despite this illustration of a smooth evolution, and a logical progression towards convergence, in fact convergence drives carriers and vendors to different architectural solutions, depending on their starting points, their rate of investment, technological preferences, and their customers' requirements. For example, particular platforms or particular network nodes may not include L2 aggregation/ switching functions - whilst others may place TDM support as a secondary priority. Unlike the classical SONET/SDH networks, whose design tended to be proscribed by standards and homogeneous in nature, today's networks have evolved organically and display more variation. In fact, several system or platform architectures may be conceived, each optimised for a particular place in a carrier's network, or for a particular position in a system vendor's product portfolio. Despite the focus on convergence, network and system architects have much more choice in their specific deployment and evolution strategy.

Copyright June 2008 TPACK A/S (www.tpack.com)

P-OTN:

Packet Optical Network Transformation

Fig. 3: Technology convergence options create P-OTP for P-OTN (picture adapted from Verizon)

Packet Optical Transport Platforms (P-OTP)

While Packet Optical Transport Networks can be achieved by combining the functionality provided by separate devices (e.g. separate Carrier Ethernet Switch, MSPP and WDM nodes), there is a desire to converge this functionality into a single device capable of providing seamless SONET/SDH support on day one, but capable of supporting a fully packet-based network thereafter. This type of device has been referred to as a Packet Optical Transport Platform (P-OTP) by Verizon networks and this is the defintion we will adopt here. From a systems perspective, definitions of P-OTP still vary, but a consensus has developed on the following top-level criteria. A model P-OTP is a standalone, managed, single network element that comprises a combination of: Reconfigurable WDM transport using OTN and ROADM technology, allowing ring and mesh topologies and capacity to be dynamically provisioned;

Integrated SONET/SDH for existing transport interoperability, multiplexing/switching to support native low latency, high availability TDM services; Connection-oriented Ethernet (including MPLS PWE3, PBB/PBB-TE and T-MPLS/MPLS-TP) packet transport aggregation/switching and client interface support; Carrier-class OAM and management capabilities with optional ASON/GMPLS dynamic control plane. Many see P-OTP as a migration-enabling platform, and a common requirement is the need to support both TDM services and packet services with a strategy for smooth migration towards an all-packet infrastructure. This all-in-one approach could theoretically lead to a collapsed network architecture with fewer elements that could lead to simplified operations, maintenance, and management. Several of the available P-OTP single platform architectures build upon existing MSPPs or MSTPs with added OTN, ROADM and/or

Copyright June 2008 TPACK A/S (www.tpack.com)

P-OTN1:

Packet Optical Network Transformation

Connection-Oriented Ethernet module support, while other platform architectures are based on universal fabrics capable of natively supporting any combination of TDM and packet traffic. However, it is also possible to deploy P-OTN using separate single-layer network elements, each optimised at the Optical and Packet switching layers. In theory this approach could help carriers leverage what they already have deployed in their networks, leading to cost savings via investment protection. In addition, this approach might also provide advantages in terms of further scalability and product maturity that today's single-element solutions might lack.

for packets. Firstly, CapEx forecasts for transport networks are not set to decline, but do show a shift in spending from SONET/SDH to P-OTN suggesting that P-OTN is earmarked to replace SONET/SDH. Secondly, emerging requirements on routers are emphasizing Layer 3 to Layer 7 support, such as Deep Packet Inspection and acceleration of applications. Analysts such as Infonetics Research track the trends in equipment investment, and the key evolutionary trends can be seen in Fig. 4. According to Infonetics, the market for optical network hardware will grow from $14bn to $15bn over the next 4 years with WDM growing at the expense of SONET/SDH. Note that the Packet Optical Transport System portion of WDM is growing from $1bn in 2007 to $2.5bn in 2011, explaining a large part of this growth.

Benefits of P-OTN
Evidence suggests that carriers are indeed interested in a separate, intelligent transport network optimised

Fig. 4: Optical network equipment revenue (source: Infonetics, Feb 2008)

Copyright June 2008 TPACK A/S (www.tpack.com)

P-OTN:

Packet Optical Network Transformation

In contrast, analyst company Heavy Reading believes that the packet-optical transport systems market segment will grow from essentially $0 in 2007 to reach $2.8bn by the end of 2012, a CAGR of 110% from 2008-2012. Despite widespread agreement that SONET/SDH is not the long-term solution, even the most aggressive forecasts predict that SONET/SDH will remain with us for the next 10 to 15 years. What's more, it does not appear that SONET/SDH is being replaced by Carrier Ethernet Switches and Routers, but by P-OTN. . An integrated P-OTN approach offers many generic benefits to carriers: Supports multiple services: TDM (SDH, PDH), Ethernet, SAN, Video; Scales from 100% packet to 100% TDM, taking care of service migration; Scales from 2Mbit/s to 10/40Gbit/s in a single platform architecture; Any-port to any-port switching, for full node flexibility; Remote management eliminates expensive and slow manual intervention; Native timing and synchronisation support for user platforms/applications;

Card commonality with legacy MSPP, easing spares inventory; OTN-based transport protection and OAM, for carrier-class availability; Connection oriented Ethernet for carrier management; C/DWDM, Mux/Demux, (R)OADM for photonic networking; ASON/GMPLS for dynamic control and service provisioning; Carriers' drive towards a lower OpEx is supported due to native P-OTN interworking with other TDM and packet platforms. Integration of all L1 and L2 technologies in a single management system means that established operational procedures can be leveraged. Carriers' drive to lower CapEx is supported due to investment protection (eg. full reuse of installed NG-SONET/SDH base). In addition, if a carrier's future network evolution or demands are unclear, this approach avoids buying into a dead-end.

10

Copyright June 2008 TPACK A/S (www.tpack.com)

P-OTN:

Packet Optical Network Transformation

TPACK: SOFTSYSTEM Modular Approach

Since the precise formulation of P-OTN is still under definition - and under standardisation - the question of how best to ensure flexibility and adaptability for a changing future must be addressed. In terms of network flexibility, the right mix of TDM and packet functionality must be supported, and this mix will change as time progresses. In terms of system flexibility, the optimum architecture must accommodate a wide range of deployment options. And in terms of chip-level requirements, critical functions must be integrated in various combinations to fit the various system architecture requirements. TPACK has developed P-OTN building blocks, as summarised in Fig. 5. Specific OTN, COE and SONET/SDH functions have been integrated into off-the-shelf engine blocks, ready for customisation and system integration. The configurations shown in Fig. 6 are illustrative based on current TPACK reference solutions. For example, the TPOX3203 Packet Optical Engine combines OTN mapping with Connection Oriented Ethernet switching and traffic management allowing a P-OTN muxponder solution. The TPOX4214 extends this functionality with SONET/SDH client interface, two OTU-2 interfaces and an ODU-1 crossconnect to allow a full P-OTN add-drop multiplexer solution. However, the strength of these solutions is that they are open to adaptation and customization by customers to fit their system architecture needs. Contact TPACK today and find out how we can help you with your P-OTN requirements at www.tpack.com/contact.html

Fig. 5: Integration of OTN, COE, SONET/SDH into P-OTN engine blocks

Copyright June 2008 TPACK A/S (www.tpack.com)

11

P-OTN:

Packet Optical Network Transformation

Fig. 6: Multiple P-OTP implementation options provide P-OTN flexibility

12

Copyright June 2008 TPACK A/S (www.tpack.com)

P-OTN:

Packet Optical Network Transformation

Conclusion
Transport networks have historically delivered reliable, deterministic operation that can be interworked, if necessary, using systems from a wide variety of different vendors. Management systems tend to be well-organized and the network itself can be readily managed and maintained by good operational staff without requiring exceptional skills. The challenge in hand is to provide the same carrier benefits but within a packet-based infrastructure. P-OTN provides Carrier Ethernet/MPLS support, scalability as well as simplified packet networking, and hence deliver the lowest cost-per-packet-bit as well as the lowest cost-per-circuit-bit. It has a valuable role to play in the future NGN. The vision of an all-packet NGN supporting multiple IP-based services is not in danger. It has rather become more nuanced as the need for a broader set of supporting solutions has been identified. Transport is still important to carriers as a separate, operationally-driven domain of intelligence and expertise designed to assist and complement efficient IP-service delivery. In this regard, one can expect a bright future for P-OTPs in P-OTN, though one can also expect that evolution will continue in both architecture and naming. Watch this space!

Copyright June 2008 TPACK A/S (www.tpack.com)

13

P-OTN:

Packet Optical Network Transformation

Appendix A OTN: Introduction to Optical Transport Network

Here, the basics of OTN are briefly introduced. OTN is a set of global ITU-T optical transport standard, accepted by both ANSI and ETSI organisations. Originally formulated as the digital wrapper, it is specified in ITU-T Recommendation G.709 and associated standards. OTN provides a high capacity multiplexing hierarchy - the Optical Transport Hierarchy (OTH) that can transparently support modern services such as Ethernet and storage, and also legacy services such as SONET/SDH. It has a well-defined in-band OAM structure following the SONET/SDH model and allows services and the optical channel to be effectively and remotely managed and monitored. It also provides standardised FEC to improve the performance of the optical channel and improve deployment economics. OTN has typically been combined with SONET/SDH in equipment platforms - and is now including packet functionality to support the P-OTN. Control and management planes such as ASON/GMPLS can also be integrated. OTN has gained wide support for its standard frame structure and sub-lambda multiplexing and is commonly used as interfaces on routers, optical switches, Metro WDM nodes, etc.) In Figure 7 the line rates defined as part of the Optical Transport Hierarchy (OTH) are shown including the OPU client rate and final OTU transmission rate once all overhead and FEC is included.

OTN structure, line rates and multiplexing

OTN was designed to address some of the scaling and transparent transport issues with SONET/SDH. SONET/SDH was designed with only two levels of switching at 1.5/2 Mbps and 50/150 Mbps. It was not envisaged at the time that higher switching capacities would be needed. Transparent transport of lower rate SONET/SDH clients in higher rate SONET/SDH transport was also an issue. OTN addresses both of these issues and introduces a range of enhancements. While OTN was primarily designed to transport SONET/SDH, it also supports a number of other clients including ATM, Ethernet, FC, IP, MPLS and GFP. A "digital wrapper" based on ITU-T recommendation G.709 is used to encapsulate client signals for transmission. A number of layers are defined in OTN, each with its own task. In Fig. 8 the layers are shown with an overview of their functions. The first 3 layers are related to the Optical Channel including the Optical Channel Payload Unit (OPU), which encapsulates the various clients and performs rate justification, the Optical Channel Data Unit (ODU), which both handles path termination (ODUkP) and 6 layers of Tandem Connection Monitoring (ODUkT) and finally, the Optical Channel Transport Unit (OTU), which adds Frame Alignment Overhead and Forward Error Correction (FEC) capabilities based on either the standard FEC (OTUk) or on proprietary, vendor specific enhanced FECs (OTUkV).

OTH Level 1 2 3

OPU client Payload capacity (Gbit/s) 2.488 320 9.995 277 40.150 519

OTU frame Optical line rate (Gbit/s) 2.666 057 10.709 225 43.018 414

Fig. 7: OTH nominal bit rates (source: ITU-T G.709/Y.1331)

14

Copyright June 2008 TPACK A/S (www.tpack.com)

P-OTN:

Packet Optical Network Transformation

Fig. 8: OTN layers (source: ITU-T G.709/Y.1331). After this point, we leave the digital or electrical domain and enter the analogue or photonic domain related to WDM transmission with the Optical Channel (OCh) Optical Multiplex Section (OMS) and Optical Transport Section (OTS). As this whitepaper concentrates on digital issues, these OTN areas will not be discussed further. As Fig. 8 shows, client signals - Ethernet, SONET/SDH or other GFP-encapsulated clients - are mapped into an OTH payload and transported transparently and unaltered to its destination. The mapping procedure adds ODU headers that operate as the embedded management channel, performs error checking and correction, and so on. Fig. 8 illustrates the multiplexing of four ODU1 signals into an ODU2. The ODU1 signals including the Frame Alignment Overhead and an all-0s pattern in the OTUk overhead locations are adapted to the ODU2 clock via justification (asynchronous mapping). Four of these adapted ODU1 signals are byte interleaved into the OPU2 payload area, and their justification control and opportunity signals (JC, NJO) are frame interleaved into the OPU2 overhead area. ODU2 overhead is added after which the ODU2 is mapped into the OTU2. OTU2 Overhead and Frame Alignment Overhead are added to complete the signal for transport via an OTc signal.

Transporting 10 Gbps Ethernet

The standard OPU2 line rate is slightly less than that required for transparent transmission of a 10G Ethernet signal, , specifically a 10G LAN PHY signal. In ITU-T G.sup43 (2008/02), a description is provided of the 5 methods to date for handling this. Three of the methods are standard and two are non-standard. The first method (described in clause 6.1) is based on use of the 10G Base-W (10G WAN PHY). This was defined in IEEE 802.3 to allow compatibility with SONET/SDH standards. In other words, the data rate is slightly less than 10G. However, this is typically a more expensive interface than the more common 10G LAN PHY. It is used for interworking as a Networkto-Network Interface (NNI), where 10G LAN PHY is preferred as a User Network Interface (UNI). For transport of 10G Base-R (10G LAN PHY) data, the standard solution (described in clause 6.2) is to terminate the Ethernet line code, preamble, Start of Frame Delimiter (SFD) and Inter-Packet Gap (IPG), extract the payload, frame using GFP-F and encode into an OPU2. This allows transparent payload transport, but removes header information. This can be an issue, as there are circumstances where transparent transport of the entire 10G LAN PHY including preamble, SFD and IPG is necessary (e.g. 15

Copyright June 2008 TPACK A/S (www.tpack.com)

P-OTN:

Packet Optical Network Transformation

Link Fault Signalling (LFS) and proprietary use of IPG and preamble bits in the Ethernet header). Two non-standard techniques are described as solutions commonly used to resolve this. In clause 7.1, the solution is to use Constant Bit Rate for 10G (CBR10G) mapping of the signal into OPU2 and to

increase the transmission clock rate to accommodate the extra bits that need to be transmitted. This allows the full 10G LAN PHY frame to be transparently transmitted. However, since the clock rate is different to standard OTN and to avoid confusion, the various layers are designated as OPU2e, ODU2e and OTU2e respectively.

Fig. 9: OTN overlapping and cascaded OAM layers

In clause 7.2, a similar technique is used for mapping to an OPU1 instead of an OPU2. It uses the 2.5G (CBR2G5) mapping described in G.709, which differs from CBR10G mapping in that it does not use Frame Stuffing (FS) bits. Overclocking is again used where the overclocked OTU1 (OTU1e) data rate is slightly less than that specified for OTU2e (11.0491 Gbps rather than 11.0957 Gbps). The various layers are designated as OPU1e, ODU1e and OTU1e. The final standard method of transmission described in clause 7.3 is designed to provide the same level of transparency for 10G Ethernet as is achieved using

GFP-T in SONET/SDH for Gigabit Ethernet (GE). However, since 10G Ethernet uses a 64B/66B block code rather than the 8B/10B code used by GE, idle characters need to be removed in order to fit into an OPU2. This is equivalent to asynchronous GFP-T transparent mapping in SONET/SDH. Since GFP-T is not suitable for 10G transmission, a modified version of GFP-F is used. Discussions are ongoing as to the evolution of these transmission methods, especially in the context of OTU3 and 40G transmission. There is a desire to make sure that standard methods will allow

16

Copyright June 2008 TPACK A/S (www.tpack.com)

P-OTN:

Packet Optical Network Transformation

transparent transport of, for example, 4 10G Ethernet LAN PHY clients in an OTU3. The concern is that if this is not accommodated that proprietary solutions will again surface hampering interoperability.

At the time of writing, definition of other ODU payloads is in progress at ITU-T. The ODU0 frame is intended to directly support GbE services, whilst the ODU4 frame is intended to support 100GbE services. So, even though OTN is a relatively old standard, there is a lot of activity right now to improve OTN's ability to accommodate various Ethernet clients.

OTN references Document ITU-T G.872 ITU-T G.709 ITU-T G.sup43: ITU-T G.975.1: ITU-T G.870: Description Architecture for the Optical Transport Network (OTN) Interfaces for the Optical Transport Network (OTN) Transport of IEEE 10G Base-R in Optical Transport Networks (OTN) Forward error correction for high bit-rate DWDM submarine systems Terms and definitions for Optical Transport Networks (OTN)

See also ITU-Ts Study Group 15 (SG15) webpage for tutorials on OTN: http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/studygroups/com15/index.asp

OTN OAM
One of the significant OTN improvements on SONET/SDH is Tandem Connection Monitoring (TCM). In OTN 8 levels of monitoring are defined including Section Monitoring (SM) for point-to-point connections, Path Monitoring (PM) for end-to-end monitoring and 6 levels of TCM where the start and endpoints can be freely defined. TCM provides the possibility to nest and overlap monitoring layers to better fit real-life situations. In Fig. 9 an example is shown where a service is provided by a service provider across two other operator's networks. In this example, PM is used to monitor the end-to-end service. TCM1 is used to monitor transmission in the Service Provider Network. TCM2 and TCM3 are used for overlapped monitoring of Operator As network. TCM4 monitors Operator Bs network while TCM5 monitors the working and protected paths in Operator Bs network. Individual links between nodes can also be monitored using SM. As can be seen, the various layers can be cascaded or overlap depending on the need.

Significance of OTN
OTN is more than just an improvement to SONET/SDH. OTN also provides manageability to a growing part of carrier's networks, namely WDM. While WDM to date has traditionally been used as a high capacity link between nodes, the introduction of ROADMs has introduced the concept of switched WDM networks based on ring, meshed or partial meshed architectures. Managing such networks is critical to assure effective use of resources and customer satisfaction. With TCM, FEC and the ability to map various clients, both TDM and Packet, OTN provides manageability, ease of provisioning and greater efficiency. For example, by using FEC, it is possible to extend the distance of fibre transmission or reduce the power required to reach an equivalent distance, which could enable more DWDM wavelengths to be accommodated. SONET/SDH did include in-band FEC capabilities, but based on a less effective scheme than the Reed Solomon based methods used in OTN. One of the major advantages of FEC in relation to ROADM networks, it that it increases the number of nodes that can be crossed without suffering packet loss due to cumulative attenuation.

Copyright June 2008 TPACK A/S (www.tpack.com)

17

P-OTN:

Packet Optical Network Transformation

The TPACK Advantage

TPACKs SMARTPACKTM P-OTN family of SOFTSYSTEM customizable chip solutions is designed specifically for Packet-Optical Transport Network (P-OTN) applications. SMARTPACKTM P-OTN integrates Packet, SONET/SDH and OTN switching and transport in a series of chip solutions designed to fit a variety of platform architectures. Since P-OTN is an emerging market, where even agreement on naming is difficult, flexibility to adapt to new requirements or configurations is paramount. Each carrier and system vendor will have their own approach and understanding of P-OTN leading to a variety of system architectures and solutions. Thus TPACKs SMARTPACKTM P-OTN solutions do not seek to dictate system design, but to adapt to it! The SMARTPACKTM P-OTN family provides a number of integration options to choose between, but also the ability to accommodate customer-specific combinations. Connection Oriented Ethernet (PBB-TE, T-MPLS and PWE3/VPLS), SONET/SDH and OTN modules are supported, allowing a flexible mix of packet switching, TDM and optical transport functionality. For example, The TPOX3203 20 Gbps Packet Optical Engine provides a Connection Oriented Ethernet switching and traffic management chip solution with an integrated OTU-2 OTN interface. The TPOX4214 40 Gbps Packet Optical Engine provides the same functionality as TPOX3203 but with 2x OTU-2 interfaces, transparent transport of SONET/SDH and an integrated ODU-1 cross-connect.

Both of these chip solutions are open to adaptation and customization as well as acting as inspiration for customer defined chip solutions designed to fit a given system architecture. SMARTPACKTM P-OTN chip solutions are based on reprogrammable FPGA technology, which allows customers to adapt and customize the solution to meet specific requirements. Future unforeseen developments can also be accommodated quickly, which will be critical in P-OTN applications, since they are still under definition in many cases. System houses can minimize risks and shorten development cycles by considering a solution from TPACK. In a new and dynamic market such as this, the stakes are high and mistakes can be costly. The TPACK approach mitigates against these risks by offering a P-OTN solution that can be adapted quickly and easily. This provides system houses with a valuable tool in exploiting the opportunities that P-OTN provides. Contact TPACK for more information on the SMARTPACKTM P-OTN solution and on how TPACK can assist you in your P-OTN development projects.

18

Copyright June 2008 TPACK A/S (www.tpack.com)

P-OTN:

Packet Optical Network Transformation

TPACK in brief
TPACK is one of the world's leading providers of embedded software solutions for packet transport. TPACK's solutions are based on Field Programmable Arrays (FPGAs) with pre-integrated and pre-tested driver, application and management software. Formed in 2001, TPACK has helped Multi-Service Provisioning Platform (MSPP) providers to rapidly develop Next Generation SONET/SDH (NG-SONET/SDH) linecard and microMSPP solutions for transport of Ethernet, IP/MPLS and VPLS packet data across the existing telecommunications network. Now TPACK is helping these and other equipment providers to address P-OTN, T-MPLS and PBT applications for reliable, carrier grade Ethernet transport using TPACK SMARTPACKTM P-OTN, PBT and T-MPLS SOFTSYSTEM and SOFTSILICON solutions. - SOFTSILICON can best be described as a Flexible ASSP: it is a standard chip solution similar to commercial off-the-shelf chips, but has the advantage that is based on programmable technology, namely FPGAs. With the latest advances in FPGA logic density and power consumption, it is now possible to offer a standard chip solution with performance similar to ASSPs. The advantage is that it takes less time to develop and upgrade these chip solutions in response to changing market conditions. SOFTSILICON thus provides a cost effective solution for Telecom Equipment Manufacturers who need the ability to react quickly to unforeseen market demands. - SOFTSYSTEM provides a tailored solution that can include SOFTSILICON products, but also software. SOFTSYSTEM supports adaptations and customizations based on specific customer requirements quickly and right-first time accelerating Time-to-Market with new system solutions. - SMARTPACKTM is TPACK's family of SOFTSILICON products and solutions targeting Carrier Ethernet

and Packet Transport applications. TPACK's SMARTPACK products include NG-SONET/SDH packet mappers and Ethernet/MPLS Carrier Packet Engines (which combine packet processing and traffic management in a single device). TPACK also provides Carrier Packet Mapper Engine products, which combine the functionality of NGSONET/SDH packet mappers and Carrier Packet Engines in a single FPGA device. This is made possible through the use of Stratix III Altera devices, which are based on 65-nm manufacturing processes. Stratix III FPGAs provide up to 50% power reduction compared to Stratix II devices allowing more compact, lower cost and lower power consuming MSPP and microMSPP solutions. - TPACK Carrier Packet Engines provide multiprotocol support of various packet protocols, such as PBB-TE/PBT, T-MPLS, MPLS, VPLS, PWE3 as well as standard 802.1ad VLAN/MAC switching. These protocols can be supported simultaneously with full OAM support and multiple parallel operations per packet without affecting throughput performance. - SONET/SDH line rates from 155 Mbps to 10 Gbps are supported. Together with NG-SONET/SDH standards (GFP-F, VCAT and LCAS), this allows packet data rates from 1.5 Mbps to 10 Gbps to be transported with high efficiency including full, transparent transport of 10 Gbps LAN Ethernet payloads. - TPACK's customers include Alcatel-Lucent, NEC, Tellabs, Xtera/Meriton Networks and Turin Networks. TPACK has over 130 design-wins with 8 of the top 10 optical transport equipment vendors who account for over 60% of the market. - TPACK is headquartered in Copenhagen, Denmark with a sales office in Palo Alto, CA, USA.

Copyright June 2008 TPACK A/S (www.tpack.com)

19

P-OTN:

Packet Optical Network Transformation Box Summary

Glossary
10GbE ANSI ASTN CapEx CET COE CWDM CY Demux DWDM E-LAN E-LINE EoSDH/SONET ETH ETSI Institute FEC FPGA GbE GFP GMPLS HDTV IEEE Engineers IETF IMS IP IPTV IP-VPN ITU-T L2 L3 LAN LCAS MPLS MPLS-TP MSPP MSTP Mux NASS NG-ADM NGN NG-SDH NPU 10Gbit/s Ethernet American National Standards Institute Automatic Switched Transport Network Capital Expenditure Carrier Ethernet Transport Connection-Oriented Ethernet Coarse WDM Calendar Year Demultiplexer Dense WDM Ethernet-LAN Ethernet-LINE Ethernet over SONET/SDH Ethernet European Telecommunications Standards Forward Error Correction Field Programmable Gate Array Gigabit Ethernet Generic Framing Procedure Generalized MPLS High Definition TV Institute of Electrical and Electronic Internet Engineering Task Force IP Multimedia Subsystem Internet Protocol IP Television IP Virtual Private Network International Telecommunication Union - Telecommunication Sector Layer 2 Layer 3 Local Area Network Link Capacity Adjustment Scheme Multi-Protocol Label Switching MPLS-Transport Profile Multi-Service Provisioning Platform Multi-Service Transport Platform Multiplexer Network Attachment Subsystem Next-generation Add-Drop Mux Next-Generation Network Next-Generation SDH Network Processing Unit OADM OAM ODUk OpEx OPT OPUk OTH OTM OTN OTUk PBB PBB-TE PBT PDH PON PONP POS P-OTN P-OTP POTS POTS PWE3 QoS RACS ROADM SAN SDH SLA SONET STM-n TCO TDM T-MPLS TSS VCAT VLAN VoIP VPLS VPN WDM XC Optical Add-Drop Mux Operations, Administration and Maintenance Optical Channel Data Unit, level k Operating Expenditure Optical Packet Transport Optical Channel Payload Unit, level k Optical Transport Hierarchy Optical Transport Module Optical Transport Network Optical Channel Transport Unit, level k Provider Backbone Bridge PBB - Traffic Engineering Provider Backbone Transport Plesiochronous Digital Hierarchy Passive Optical Network Packet Optical Networking Platform Packet over SONET/SDH Packet-OTN Packet-Optical Transport Platform Plain Old Telephony System Packet Optical Transport System Pseudo-Wire Emulation Edge-to-Edge Quality of Service Resource and Admission Control Subsystem Reconfigurable OADM Storage Area Network Synchronous Digital Hierarchy Service Level Agreement Synchronous Optical Network Synchronous Transport Module, level n Total Cost of Ownership Time Division Multiplexing Transport-MPLS Transport Service Switch Virtual Concatenation Virtual LAN Voice over IP Virtual Private LAN Service Virtual Private Network Wavelength Division Multiplexing Cross-connect

20

Copyright June 2008 TPACK A/S (www.tpack.com)