MAXIMIZING LTE BENEFITS USING TRUE CARRIER ETHERNET BACKHAUL How to Create Low-Touch, High-Velocity Networks

Transcription

1 MAXIMIZING LTE BENEFITS USING TRUE CARRIER ETHERNET BACKHAUL How to Create Low-Touch, High-Velocity Networks Abstract Mobile Network Operators (MNOs) are evolving their wireless infrastructure to the Long Term Evolution (LTE) standard that offers low latency and high bandwidth to deliver rich content to smart mobile devices. This paper articulates the challenges and complexities in LTE design with the recommendation to use Carrier Ethernet- based solutions for backhaul from cell sites to reduce Total Cost of Ownership (TCO). Backhaul providers can use this approach to scale their networks costeffectively. Finally, this paper describes Ciena s solution, which combines True Carrier Ethernet-based cell site demarcation with converged optical Ethernet aggregation to build scalable cost-effective networks. LTE Drives Higher Data Usage As the popularity of smartphones and other intelligent mobile devices increases, MNOs recognize that revenue growth hinges upon their ability to deliver a wider range of mobile broadband applications and services, which require higher bandwidth and lower latency, to deliver the expected service quality. For example, a video stream viewed on a tablet computer might require HD-quality bandwidth with rapid access to large cached Over-The-Top (OTT) content files to achieve the consistent video download required for smooth playback. However, delivering such applications and services can quickly overwhelm the capacity of current 3G wireless networks and associated backhaul networks. As a result, MNOs worldwide are adopting the new wireless technologies, including WiMAX, HSPA+, and LTE. These next-generation technologies address the limitations of mobile radio access, enabling the necessary high throughput and low latency. In particular, the LTE 3GPP (Release 8) specification provides downlink peak rates of at least 100 Mb/s, with future LTE releases offering rates up to 1 Gb/s. If needed, this specification also provides support for seamless interworking with older network technology such as GSM, cdmaone, UMTS, and CDMA MNOs can certainly benefit from the higher spectral efficiency of 4G to support more users and higher usage rates. Although the cost per base station is expected to be similar to 3G, LTE s higher spectral efficiency will allow MNOs to realize cost savings up to 75 percent. 2 This price point is critical to offering wireless service plans at reasonable rates. According to TeliaSonera which was one of the first MNOs to adopt the technology LTE leads to much higher usage rates per month. For example, users of 3G smartphones, 3G data cards, and LTE data cards consume an average of approximately 400MB, 5GB and 15GB, respectively. 3 At these usage levels, the amount of bandwidth consumed by intelligent mobile devices will quickly reach levels equal to that of wired broadband connections. To take advantage of LTE, backhaul service providers must support on the scale of hundreds of Mb/s per cell site for backhaul, compared to multiples of T1s (n x 1.5 Mb/s) or E1s (n x 2 Mb/s) for earlier generations. This paradigm shift in backhaul calls for networking options that scale cost-effectively the only way to minimize TCO when migrating to LTE base stations. LTE (Wireless Layer) Design is Complicated 3GPP 4 identifies the backhaul architecture for LTE, with requirements to support two key interfaces: > S1: the interface from LTE s to the EPC. The EPC includes the and the > : the interface connecting s to other s in specific logical groups Both interfaces are used to transfer control plane (messaging) and bearer plane (user data) packets. In addition, there is the option to scale coverage with microcells (low-power s covering limited areas), picocells (typically indoor areas like offices, shopping malls, train stations), or femtocells (home or small business coverage). 1 LTE An End-to-End Description of Network Architecture and Elements. 3GPP LTE Encyclopedia TeliaSonera, LTE Forum, November GPP TS W Whitepaper

2 Figure 1. LTE Logical Architecture User IP The evolution of wireless technologies has resulted in additional functionality, such as distributed radio control and an IP bearer plane. The s at the cell sites are IP endpoints, with support for an IP bearer plane that transports user traffic in GTP tunnels, and control traffic in SCTP tunnels. The s, as IP endpoints, map user traffic to bearer IP flows (S1) between s and / controllers. If a user roams to a different cell site, the bearer IP flow () interface between cell s can be used to exchange protocol messages for coordinating the handoff between neighboring sites. Figure 1 shows the interface between s, along with the S1 interface between the s and the controllers. The S1 interface is expected to be implemented mostly over point-to-point connections between the and the controllers, although point-tomultipoint connectivity can be used as well. Typically, the interface is implemented over multipoint connections between a subset of neighboring cell sites, usually on the same IP subnet. Although this set of neighboring cells can be as large as 32 or 64, between four and 16 is expected to be the typical operating model. The interface will benefit from lower and consistent latency for protocol message exchange between cell sites in the same IP subnet, and consistency in behavior, particularly when introducing advanced LTE capabilities (release 10 and higher) such as Coordinated Multipoint Transmission (CoMP). LTE design is not just about scaling bandwidth to support packet traffic. Given the trends in usage of bursty IP applications, the focus shifts to support high-volume multimedia and data traffic. Designing the LTE network requires engineering to support packet traffic with different Class of Service (CoS) levels that now share the same backhaul. Low-volume critical applications or data that require stringent performance should not be impacted by high-volume best effort data. Additional complexity arises as MNOs attempt to optimize airtime usage of the shared medium, over which upwards of S1 S1 S1 LTE Signaling & Bearer one hundred or more users must be supported on a single sector at any given time. Smartphones use apps as a user interface to cloud services, but misbehaving or poorly designed apps can sometimes consume a whole lot more bandwidth than expected. 5 In addition to consuming more bandwidth, smart devices can lock up the allocated communication channel with a status of in use by periodically requesting information updates. This commonly occurs when communicating with social networking sites. In the end, additional effort is required to optimize use of the limited spectrum (for example, 5, 10, or 20 MHz channels) for the wireless link between user devices and the. Packet Backhaul for LTE EPC Any transport network for mobile backhaul must include the following key attributes: > A standard interoperable interface as demarcation between the MNO and backhaul provider > Service connectivity that supports wireless layer logical interfaces, such as point-to-point only or a combination of point-to-point and multipoint, depending on the traffic class > Service definitions with Service Level Specifications (SLS), as well as the required traffic engineering to meet the SLS objectives such as delay, jitter, or availability > A scalable network that can support service connectivity with one thousand or more cell sites per metro domain, multiple service instances per cell site to support various traffic classes, multiple MNOs per cell site, and multiple co-located generations of mobile technology > A resilient network with protocols and mechanisms for failure detection and recovery to achieve availability objectives in the SLS with additional port, node, or path diversity support, if needed > Protocols and interfaces to perform Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) of the provisioned service instances > A network synchronization service to enable frequency synchronization of all s to a primary reference clock, and, for TDD LTE, phase synchronization of the s 5 2

3 With LTE defined with use of IP bearers and 3G (UMTS, HSPA, HSPA+) transitioning from TDM, or ATM to IP bearers for transport of user and signaling traffic, the backhaul network is changing to support packet connectivity services. According to the market research firm Infonetics Research, Carriers everywhere are increasing the bandwidth on their backhaul networks to handle this exploding IP data traffic, and the most efficient, cost-effective way to do that is to transition from TDM to packet IP/Ethernet, which is driving the mobile backhaul equipment market. 4 Packet backhaul can also provide more bandwidth and QoS granularity than legacy TDM services, providing higher degrees of flexibility and better scalability. Associated with the transition to packet backhaul transport is the need to support a network synchronization service to cell sites. A synchronization service can be provided independent of the packet backhaul infrastructure (as with BITS or GPS) or directly over the packet backhaul infrastructure (as with IEEE1588v2 or Synchronous Ethernet). A network synchronization service is used by operators who do not want to employ a GPS or an off-net source such as T1/E1 or BITS for their synchronization, who need alternate options in case of failure of GPS or off-net solutions, who might also need phase synchronization (for TDD LTE) in addition to existing frequency synchronization, or who just want to reduce reliance on expensive legacy T1/E1 connections. Network synchronization that meets LTE base station requirements is critical to minimizing the occurrence of mobile service interruptions to mobile subscribers. LTE requires stringent control of the RF channel frequency to ensure accurate handover between cell sites and uninterrupted service. Backhaul providers also need to transition to a model that supports faster rollout of service connectivity with the right level of automated service creation, activation, and management. This will enable faster time to market for new services, enhanced revenue generation, and, ultimately, higher profits. Packet Backhaul: Ethernet as a Service When adopting a packet backhaul model, service providers should recognize that Ethernet acts as more than just an interface between an MNO s wireless network elements and the backhaul provider s transport network elements. Ethernet s popularity as the transport layer for IP packets in LANs is well-documented. Additional Carrier Ethernet functionality makes it perfectly suited for transport across a WAN. MEF-compliant interfaces such as UNIs can provide the interoperable demarcation for MNOs to use the packet backhaul network. MEF s EVC-based services enable virtualized bandwidth resources to support point-to-point, multipoint, and point-to-multipoint connectivity with traffic engineering functions, for guaranteed network resource allocation to enhance performance. The definition of a connection among UNIs in the EVC enables the packet backhaul to apply fault and performance management for that connection. Figure 2 compares the legacy model for 2G/3G and the use of Ethernet interfaces for 3G and LTE services. Figure 2 also shows the relevant standards organizations (IEEE, ITU-T, MEF, BBF) working to enable and fortify Ethernet as a robust and reliable service and network layer solution. In the legacy framework supporting 2G or early 3G wireless networks, the demarcation was a PDH or SONET/SDH Mobile BH Capability 2G/3G (TDM/ATM) 3G/4G (Ethernet) Interface (Demarcation) Services Service mapping Service OAM (FM) Service OAM (PM) Standard CoS nxe1, DS3, OC-N FE, GE, 10GE PHYs ITU-T UNI: MEF 13 & MEF 20 Private Line EVC types, External Interfaces & Service Attributes MEF 6.x, MEF 10.x Sub-rate timeslots (TDM), VP/VC (ATM) Service Attributes (eg. CEVLAN to EVC map, CoSID, BWPs) ITU-T, BBF (ATM UNI) MEF 10.x SONET/SDH OH bytes, ATM OAM (LB,CC,etc.) MEGs, MEPs/MIPs, CC, Linktrace, Loopback ITU-T MEF 22.x, MEF 17, MEF SOAM FM IA, ITU-T SES, SD, BER, A, UAS, CTD(V), CLR SLS per CoSID w/ Attributes & Objectives ITU-T MEF 22.x, MEF 10.x, MEF SOAM PM IA, MEF 23.x, ITU-T CLP bit if ATM 4-CoS & Performance Objectives for Performance Tiers 1 & 2 BBF MEF 23.x, MEF 22.x SONET/SDH, PDH, BITS Synchronous Ethernet & Packet Method Synchronization ITU-T MEF 22.x, IEEE 1588v2 ITU-T G.8261/G.8262/G.8264/G.8263/G /G O&M EMS/NMS to NE, Northbound to OSS, MIBs EMS/NMS to NE, Information Model, MIBs, Service turn-up/test TMF, ITU-T MEF 15, MEF 7, SOAM MIBs, IEEE, IETF, TMF, ITU-T (Y.156sam) Figure 2. Comparison of legacy transport vs. packet transport models 3

4 UNI-C UNI-N UNI a UNI c EVC (E-LAN) for LTE Backhaul UNI-C UNI-N UNI-N UNI-C MEF 6.1 Service EVC (E-Line) for S1 Figure 3. Mobile backhaul with MEF-compliant interfaces and services interface. For more advanced 3G and 4G networks, it is now a MEF-compliant UNI using Ethernet interfaces. The legacy model had a service that was identified either by sub-rate or full rate timeslots (TDM) or a virtual connection identifier (ATM Virtual Path or Virtual Connection). For today s 3G and 4G backhaul, a Carrier Ethernet architecture with MEFcompliant UNIs will allow service to be identified by the set of CE-VLANs in the Ethernet frames sent by the and controller equipment (as customer equipment) to the packet backhaul transport network. The key attributes standardized interfaces, scalable services, OAM, and synchronization of a mobile backhaul solution are met with Carrier Ethernetbased packet backhaul framework. Figure 3 shows the reference framework for LTE backhaul. The connectivity options for the S1 interface (point-to-point EVC) and the interface (multipoint EVC) are also shown as examples, but the connectivity choice can be specific to MNOs. Therefore, a packet backhaul network should support the full range of point-to-point (E-Line), multipoint (E-LAN), and point-to-multipoint (E-Tree) services. The performance requirements (availability or frame delay) can vary for S1 and. With the ability to support one or more CoS instances across the packet backhaul network, the connectivity can support different traffic classes with different performance requirements. Figure 4 shows a simple view of bandwidth allocation for the EVCs as well as the different traffic classes, such EVC 1 as distinguishing between user data traffic and synchronization traffic, or perhaps differentiating multiple MNOs at a single location, or even multiple generations of mobile traffic from the same MNO. In Figure 4, the EVC2 can be a set of CE- VLANs with each CE-VLAN for a traffic class such as User or Signaling or Synchronization. Controller UNI b The user traffic class might be further classified as video, Internet, or voice, as shown in the diagram. It is also possible for the packet backhaul to support these traffic classes in different EVCs or in the same EVC per. A separate EVC can also be a better choice for packet method-based Synchronization traffic class, since such an EVC can be a multipoint type to UNIs at all s served by the packet network. Since most traffic is best effort, backhaul providers must avoid applying highpriority traffic s stringent performance requirements to all traffic. They can avoid such over-provisioning of bandwidth in the network by supporting at least two classes of services (high-priority and low-priority), and, if possible, an additional strict priority forwarding class for synchronization traffic to minimize its delay variation. Figure 5 shows a typical topology used in backhaul for LTE deployments. An MNO might have fixed radio links or fiber connectivity from a hub cell site to other cell sites subtended off the hub site. The topology can be a mix of rings, spokes, daisy chains, and partial mesh, depending on the required geographical coverage and resiliency to faults. This section of the network can benefit from protection mechanisms such as Link Aggregation Group (LAG), with two or more parallel Ethernet links. Carrier Ethernet switches can provide robust protocols and mechanisms to support fast fault detection and recovery from failures of fixed radio links. Fixed radio links, both microwave and millimeter wave, are used in nearly half of all mobile backhaul deployments worldwide. Point-to-point, high-bandwidth, fixed-packet radio systems offer simple and cost-efficient solutions for LTE backhaul, since they support much higher data rates than copper lines and often prove to be less expensive compared with laying new fiber to the cell site. Link User EVC 2 Signaling Sync User Figure 4. Bandwidth allocation for varied traffic classes Video Internet VoIP Backhaul providers networks are typically singledomain or two-domain aggregation and either a ring or mesh topology for metro. To scale a metro domain to support Ethernet and optical services, a typical metro solution will use converged optical Ethernetbased Packet-Optical Transport System (POTS) solutions. In this architecture, the same network can support packet backhaul for LTE and other residential/ 4

5 MNO Fiber-Radio Backhaul Network Mobile Switching Center (IP endpoint) L2 L2 L3 MNO1 UNI 10GE UNI EPC Community nx10ge 100GE Metro DWDM POTS 300 Mbps GE EPC MNO2 Access Aggregation Access Metro Mobile Switching Center Figure 5. Topology and architecture for a typical LTE packet backhaul deployment business services. With multiple MNOs at some sites, higher-capacity Gigabit Ethernet (GbE) UNIs, and a larger number of s per metro area, back-haul providers can expect to scale their networks to multiple 10GbE, 40GbE, or even 100GbE wavelengths in the near future. Providers will need to support various protection and path diversity options for resilient connectivity to enable LTE backhaul. As wireless networks take their place as mainstream data highways, higher network availability becomes more critical, since interruptions of longer duration can reduce customer loyalty by making applications unreliable, slow or inaccessible. Carrier Ethernet Reduces CAPEX and OPEX The number of s in a domain can grow tremendously as LTE services are rolled out. When scaling LTE networks, connectivity is optimized and associated costs are reduced in line with the simplicity and reliability of the backhaul network. A key advantage of a Carrier Ethernet-based backhaul architecture arises from the fact that LTE is IP-based. This makes Carrier Ethernet the best transport model, while also providing transparency to the IP layer. Figure 6 illustrates this transparency. The user IP traffic (connecting end-user applications to information sources) is tunneled over GTP and carried across a transport IP layer (a separate IP layer from the user IP layer), and transported optimally by a Carrier Ethernet backhaul network. IP-routed Layer 3 (L3) IP/MPLS network solutions add operational complexity and thus increase the cost to scale and operate L3-VPNs (forwarding/routing of IP packets). These solutions force backhaul providers to extend complex forwarding paradigms (data plane) and complex dynamic User IP (user IP hidden from backhaul network) IP Bearer S1 EPC L2 CE Backhaul Network Figure 6. Carrier Ethernet provides transparency to the IP Layer 5

6 L3 L2 IP Routed IP MPLS GE BGP LDP RSVP-TE multipoint LSP OSPF-TE ISIS-TE Hop-by-hop routing Q-in-Q G.8032 / G.8031 Carrier Ethernet L2 Switched H-VPLS VPLS MPLS-TP GE tldp Optional: LDP RSVP-TE OSPF-TE ISIS-TE PBB (S-MAC + -MAC) SPBM SPBM-TE with carrier-class attributes not only provides the right connectivity, but also enables backhaul providers to offer a rich suite of OAM functionality to provision, measure, and troubleshoot their networks. By leaving the IP functionality to the mobile endpoints that actually need it (such as the and the EPC), and avoiding it in the backhaul network, carriers can manage backhaul costs much more efficiently using simpler forwarding rules based on subscriber policies to facilitate or constrain connectivity as required. Figure 7. Protocol complexity of L3 IP/MPLS vs. L2 CE solutions routing and signaling protocols (control plane) all the way from the metro and aggregation network into the access domain. Moreover, with leased IP backhaul services, the IP-based backhaul provider often must coordinate IP information with the MNO. Furthermore, leasing IP services usually costs more than leasing carrier Ethernet services. Figure 7 illustrates the protocol complexity of L3 IP/MPLS-routed solutions relative to that of Carrier Ethernet solutions. The left side of each colored box depicts the forwarding plane complexity, while the right side addresses the control plane. The added complexity of IP/MPLS solutions can dramatically increase both CAPEX and OPEX. This is most evident with regard to operating, troubleshooting, and maintaining the network. Each protocol-specific forwarding plane has its own associated suite of OAM functionality. This introduces additional complexity when coordinating and managing OAM services across complex protocol stacks, often with partial OAM support (such as with IP), leading to higher operating costs. The complexity can also lead to higher hardware costs, as the processing power at the backhaul routers must support computation and storage of statistical data related to the performance and fault management planes. Routers also can be more costly, given that the MIB size to support more complex protocols can be ten times higher than that of simpler protocols, like Carrier Ethernet. A simpler option that offers far lower TCO is a Layer 2 (L2) Carrier Ethernet network for cell site backhaul. L2-VPNs can efficiently provide point-to-point, point-to-multipoint or multipoint connectivity. Layer 2 switching offers stability and simplicity, including inter-tower point-multipoint connections. Fewer protocol layers mean simpler provisioning, management, and restoration. An Ethernet network enhanced A Carrier Ethernet solution, whether fiber-, microwave radio-, or millimeter radio-based, permits strong levels of control and robust functionality, making it a truly cost-efficient LTE backhaul solution. With Carrier Ethernet, backhaul providers can scale the network quickly and achieve the lowest cost per bit as they increase bandwidth to meet growing user demand. Carrier Ethernet also enables network operators to match the connectivity provisioned across the network with the data traffic seeking to use that capacity. Equally important, the inherent flexibility of Carrier Ethernet helps backhaul providers avoid costly over-provisioning of the network, even as MNOs demand multiple classes of service across it. True Carrier Ethernet from Ciena: Simple and Cost-Efficient Ciena s product portfolio delivers True Carrier Ethernet services, with solutions for both fiber-based and radio (microwave or millimeter wave) access networks. True Carrier Ethernet services support a wide range of capabilities and features over the minimum defined standards put forth by the MEF, as depicted in Figure 8 below. These interoperable and standards-compliant advances improve backhaul providers ability to confidently deploy, provision, and manage costeffective LTE backhaul services featuring standardization, scalability, reliability, QoS, and service management. Combined, these service features significantly accelerate and automate scalable Ethernet service creation and activation. Examples of the advances and benefits of True Carrier Ethernet, as defined by MEF, are described below. Standardized Services Ciena provides the greatest flexibility for building and deploying Ethernet networks. By supporting all MEF services across any topology and different tunnel encapsulation 6

7 formats, backhaul providers can optimize bandwidth, network paths, and reliability alternatives without sacrificing service quality or selection. Scalability Ciena offers backhaul providers the ability to scale to extremely high capacity, in granular steps. Patent-pending virtual switching technology and simultaneous support for multiple encapsulations on the same port provide the greatest flexibility and interoperability with existing and emerging technologies. Virtual switches enable backhaul providers to partition switch resources logically to: Ciena s True Carrier Ethernet MEF Carrier Ethernet LAN Ethernet > Enterprise price points > Ubiquity > Simplicity > Standardized Services > Scalability > Reliability > Service Mgmt Figure 8. True Carrier Ethernet services > Quality of Service > MEF Carrier Ehternet with value-added enhancements > Best in breed scalability, resilience, QoS enforcement and service management > Deterministic Traffic routing with connection-oriented technologies > Interoperable with a variety of MPLS/VPLS architectures > Improve L2-VPN security > Ease interworking among different encapsulations forms > Enable unlimited MAC scalability for point-to-point services Virtual switching, combined with connection-oriented Ethernet, unlocks the benefits of E-LAN and multicast services over a protected, traffic-engineered infrastructure. Reliability Ciena s product portfolio provides Ethernet flexibility and transmission reliability with an array of protection mechanisms. This capability simplifies the provisioning and ongoing maintenance effort, reducing operations costs. Quality of Service Superior QoS controls provide predictable service delivery. Ciena s solution provides unprecedented levels of service classification, enabling rich service stratification for broader customer appeal and higher revenues. Service Management Ciena has innovative and patent-pending technologies that dramatically improve the time to discover network elements and resources and to provision services and tunnels. This ability enables rapid and accurate provisioning of flexible services. Service provisioning is simple through the use of wizards. For instance, an operator can select two endpoints for a point-to-point service and run the provisioning wizard to set service-specific fields, automatically creating a service and configuring any intermediate elements. Service attributes, such as QoS parameters including committed information rate, excess information rate, and burst parameters, can be configured now and automatically changed later through the use of service templates defining those parameters. In addition, True Carrier Ethernet supports a rich set of OAM features defined in the latest versions of IEEE, ITU, and IETF standards to minimize service disruptions and maximize network efficiency. These features enable backhaul providers to monitor the status of system and network links; measure the performance of Ethernet services; confirm link and service throughput and quality; conform to SLAs; and distribute this management information across the network. Converged Optical Ethernet Ciena promotes complementary service delivery models: Carrier Ethernet and optical. Service providers and enterprises prefer MEF Carrier Ethernet connectivity services for enabling a standardized model to support interoperable and cost-effective transport of IP-based applications with guaranteed performance. Carrier Ethernet services, with IP packet flow awareness, are rapidly replacing legacy connectivity services including T1, E1, ATM, and Frame Relay. A full range of service topologies (point-point, pointmultipoint and multipoint) supporting a large number of endpoints, such as base station sites, with scalable service delivery is seen as a critical requirement. Ciena s True Carrier Ethernet functionalities are developed and added in a consistent manner in both purpose-built Carrier Ethernet switches and converged optical Ethernet platforms for end-to-end scalable architectures. Optical services such as private lines support dedicated, point-to-point, high-bandwidth applications that often do not require packet awareness across the network. Optical services are supported over an OTN layer, providing variable levels of bandwidth granularity that enable support for both subwavelength and full-wavelength private line connections. The OTN standard rates include 1, 10, 40, and 100 Gb/s, all of which align with 1, 10, 40, and 100GbE interface definitions. Other special service clients, such as Fibre Channel, ESCON, or video, can also be carried efficiently using the same OTN infrastructure. OTN s path and section management supervision provide excellent and familiar tools for SLA monitoring and verification. 7

8 The backhaul provider can combine Carrier Ethernet access requirements with scalable architectural requirements for the metro core using Ciena s Converged Optical Ethernet solutions. Putting It All Together With Ciena s True Carrier Ethernet for LTE, backhaul providers can interconnect multiple sites over a single, reliable, and cost-effective network to provide guaranteed, scalable services that are compatible with their growing suite of IP and Ethernet applications. Using Ciena service delivery switches at cell sites, backhaul providers can tag or classify traffic for differentiated services or different applications. Customer satisfaction and loyalty are ensured via strong SLA guarantees based on a rich set of QoS and traffic management techniques, combined with sophisticated diagnostic OAM tools. Ciena service aggregation switches cost-effectively interwork with MNOs existing IP/MPLS in the evolved packet core, providing efficient aggregation over a shared Metro Ethernet Network (MEN) and minimizing the number of expensive IP/ MPLS router ports required. The aggregators provide VLANto-MPLS mapping, and Ethernet traffic separation for service transparency, security, and scalability. This configuration is simpler and less expensive than a routed L3-VPN and allows the MNO to maintain in-house control over routing tables as well as security and encryption techniques. Backhaul providers can take advantage of the True Carrier Ethernet service management capabilities to achieve rapid automated service activation in less than five minutes; simplify and scale their operations; and lower deployment costs for Glossary of Terms service activation, changes, and upgrades. Rather than a truck roll to each site, backhaul providers can modify service templates automatically from remote locations. Set Yourself Apart in a Competitive Market Backhaul providers are in a prime position to capitalize on the growing market for delivering Carrier Ethernet services to MNOs. Residential users have demonstrated tremendous demand for mobile bandwidth, while enterprises worldwide seek to leverage wireless connectivity to access new business applications flexibly. In turn, MNOs can deliver SaaS, cloud computing, and other services over high-speed mobile broadband connections using LTE. Moreover, because True Carrier Ethernet enables operators to turn up switches in under five minutes, MNOs can reduce their time to revenue by 75 percent when delivering services. And True Carrier Ethernet s advantages extend far beyond the revenue side of the business. Customers using True Carrier Ethernet show savings of 30 percent in both CAPEX and OPEX, compared with the costs of using Layer 3 solutions. Satisfying growing demand for these services while holding the line on cost requires a smart approach. Ciena s product portfolio combines intelligent devices and software to create low-touch, high-velocity Carrier Ethernet access and metro networks. With these, MNOs can take advantage of a common, consistent way to significantly accelerate and automate service creation and activation and establish a competitive differentiation. Please contact a Ciena account director for more information, or visit Ciena may from time to time make changes to the products or specifications contained herein without notice. ESCON is a registered trademark of International Business Machines Corporation Ciena Corporation. All rights reserved. WP GPP BITS CE-VLAN EVC GPS GPRS GTP IEEE IETF Third Generation Partnership Program Building Integrated Timing Supply Carrier Ethernet-Virtual Local Area Network Evolved Node B Ethernet Virtual Connection Global Position System General Packet Radio Service GPRS Tunneling Protocol Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers Internet Engineering Task Force IP Internet Protocol (Layer 3) ITU-T International Telecommunications Union - Telecommunications Standardization Sector LAN MEF MIB OTN PBB-TE QoS SaaS TDD UDP UNI WAN Local Area Network New name for entity formerly known as Metro Ethernet Forum Management Information Base Mobility Management Entity Optical Transport Network Provider Backbone Bridge - Traffic Engineering Quality of Service Software as a Service Serving Gateway Time Division Duplex User Datagram Protocol User-to-Network Interface Wide Area Network Specialists in unlocking network potential to help you change the way you compete Winterson Road Linthicum, MD (US and Canada) (outside US and Canada) (international)