What characterises an NGN?
Wrote a bit about Telecom's NGN variant here: http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/UNID/C740B2DD592E9EDDCC256F58000FBD33 I'm curious as to what the NOG thinks of this approach. If I look at: http://www.iec.org/online/tutorials/next_gen/ an NGN is defined as: "The next-generation network seamlessly blends the public switched telephone network (PSTN) and the public switched data network (PSDN), creating a single multiservice network. Rather than large, centralized, proprietary switch infrastructures, this next-generation architecture pushes central-office (CO) functionality to the edge of the network. The result is a distributed network infrastructure that leverages new, open technologies to reduce the cost of market entry dramatically, increase flexibility, and accommodate both circuit-switched voice and packet-switched data." Is it fair to assume that pushing CO functionality to the network edge requires an end-to-end managed solution? -- Juha
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004, Juha Saarinen wrote:
Is it fair to assume that pushing CO functionality to the network edge requires an end-to-end managed solution?
It doesn't appear unreasonable to make that assumption, if you're determined to control every connection to your network to the N-th degree. What surprised me was the non-encapsulation of routing protocols. Have they not heard of MPLS? It does rather defeat the purpose of HA networks if you're unable to do anything with those networks beyond a proscribed subset of what's possible. What's also interesting is this FTTP pilot in Flat Bush and Highbrook. Have TCNZ said anything about what broadband options will be available to the people in those premises? DSL's obviously not going to work. -- Matthew Poole "Don't use force. Get a bigger hammer."
Matthew Poole wrote:
What's also interesting is this FTTP pilot in Flat Bush and Highbrook. Have TCNZ said anything about what broadband options will be available to the people in those premises? DSL's obviously not going to work.
This is what Telecom said in September: http://idg.net.nz/news.nsf/UNID/9D38C151760DF38ECC256F0900181F70 -- Juha
At 1:30 PM +1300 29/11/04, Matthew Poole wrote:
What surprised me was the non-encapsulation of routing protocols. Have they not heard of MPLS? It does rather defeat the purpose of HA networks
I imagine they have, and that is exactly what is driving those restrictions. If you buy services off us, on our converged network, which is MPLS based, we provide only certain routing protocols, and encourage you to think about why you want them anyway. (If it's for HA and you want diverse carriers, then we encourage the use of BGP.) -- Michael Newbery IP Architect TelstraClear Limited
I have been working with TNZ on there NG network for over 3 years now and
we still can't get a formal commitment from them to allow us to use OSPF
or BGP as the standard routing protocol. We require OSPF or BGP to allow
for redundancy within our Wide Area Network. The other issue we have with
the TNZ NG network is the way TNZ is trying to implement the network and
take full control of it. In the past APN has always managed there own
networks (internal and WAN), moving forward TNZ propose they fully manage
the WAN for APN. This will bring a hole raft of issue to us, as we run
redundant links to most of our sites (one link by TNZ the other by TCL). I
can see if we allow TNZ to fully manage the WAN for us we will get back to
a huge finger pointing between TNZ and TCL over issues.
Drew Collins
Group Communications Manager
Group IT Services
APN Holdings NZ Ltd
DDI: +64 9 373 9573
Mobile +64 21 823268
Fax: +64 9 373 6411
Ph: +64 9 379 5050
eMail: drew.collins(a)apn.co.nz
Website: www.apn.co.nz
Juha Saarinen
participants (4)
-
Drew.Collins＠apn.co.nz -
Juha Saarinen -
Matthew Poole -
Michael Newbery