市場調査レポート

メトロ向けパケット光伝送システム(P-OTS)市場:調査分析

Metro Packet-Optical Transport 2.0: A Heavy Reading Survey Analysis

発行 Heavy Reading 商品コード 264736
出版日 ページ情報 英文 36 Pages
納期: 即日から翌営業日
価格
本日の銀行送金レート: 1USD=107.50円で換算しております。
Back to Top
メトロ向けパケット光伝送システム(P-OTS)市場:調査分析 Metro Packet-Optical Transport 2.0: A Heavy Reading Survey Analysis
出版日: 2013年03月21日 ページ情報: 英文 36 Pages
概要

メトロネットワーク(都市内通信網)のパケット光伝送システム(P-OTS)市場は、2012年の関連機器の売上ベースで、12億米ドル以上の規模に成長しました。

当レポートでは、メトロ向けP-OTS市場について調査分析し、現状と将来の見通しについて検証し、主要なP-OTS機器サプライヤーのプロファイルを提供して、概略以下の構成でお届けいたします。

第1章 イントロダクション・調査結果

  • 調査結果
  • 調査範囲・構造
  • 調査手法

第2章 調査分析

  • 定義
  • 促進要因・応用
  • 特徴・機能
  • 導入タイムライン
  • パケット光制御プレーン
  • ベンダー主導

第3章 ベンダープロファイル

  • Adtran
  • Alcatel-Lucent
  • Ciena
  • Cisco Systems
  • Cyan
  • ECI Telecom
  • Ericsson
  • 富士通
  • Huawei
  • Juniper Networks
  • Tejas Networks
  • Tellabs

付録

図表

目次

Heavy Reading has been tracking metro packet-optical transport systems (P-OTS) since 2007. Since that time, the product segment (as defined by Heavy Reading) has grown from nothing to more than $1.2 billion in equipment sales in 2012.

On the surface, the growth in this segment is impressive. However, in the larger context of the market it was set to replace (the Sonet/SDH segment), P-OTS has not lived up to expectations. In 2012, legacy Sonet/SDH spending was $3 billion - meaning that operators spent three times more on legacy Sonet/SDH gear in 2012 than they spent on metro P-OTS. In this context, we view the era of P-OTS 1.0 (2007-2012) as only moderately successful, as the advent of P-OTS was intended to herald the death of the Sonet/SDH multiservice provisioning platform (MSPP).

We believe that two major factors have limited the growth prospects of metro P-OTS over the past five years:

  • Although packet-optical systems promised to deliver the best of both packet functionality and TDM functionality, many operators did not accept P-OTS systems as truly best of breed in both. Our research over the years showed that operators believed pure-play packet products were superior at packets compared to the P-OTS hybrids on the market.
  • Packet technology itself was not ready for prime time as a true replacement for TDM transport - regardless of what platform was used. Packet transport technology and standards needed to evolve and mature as operators were unwilling to sacrifice the reliability, familiarity and TDM efficiency of Sonet/SDH in order to enjoy the lower costs and higher capacities of Ethernet/IP transport. Packet innovations included Synchronous Ethernet (SyncE)/1588v2 timing and synchronization and MPLS-TP OAM, among others.

Heavy Reading believes that we are entering a new era of P-OTS, which we'll call P-OTS 2.0, which seeks to build on the packet shortcomings of the first generation. The excerpt below shows that, as we enter this new phase, P-OTS is finally poised to make the crossover and unseat Sonet/SDH as the dominant form of optical transport in metro and aggregation networks.

Excerpt 1: Metro Optical Revenue by Segment, 2010-2016

Source: Heavy Reading

In this new era, we expect to see the following:

  • The focus of packet-optical shifts from TDM functions to packet functions
  • Pure packet implementations of P-OTS begin to ramp and, ultimately, dominate
  • Switched OTN enters the metro, removing the need for Sonet/SDH fabrics in new elements
  • 100Gbit/s (100G) takes hold in the metro

As we enter this new metro P-OTS 2.0 phase, Heavy Reading issued a global operator survey to get a better understanding of operator plans, strategies and perceptions regarding the present state and future of packet-optical transport. Heavy Reading's Fall 2012 Metro Packet-Optical Transport Survey was conducted in November 2012. Respondents were drawn from the network operator list of the Light Reading readership database. A total of 114 service provider respondents participated in the survey.

In addition to detailed survey results, the report also profiles 12 major suppliers of P-OTS equipment. This includes the 11 suppliers tracked by Heavy Reading in the Packet-Enabled Optical Networking Quarterly Market Tracker, with the addition of carrier Ethernet supplier Juniper Networks, which scored highly in our survey.

There is increasing interest in 100G transport in metro networks, and so, in our survey, we wanted to get a better reading on operator timelines for 100G deployments. We asked operators to select a timeline for wide-scale metro 100G deployments; the results are shown in the excerpt below. The results point to a 100G ramp-up in 2013, with a big bump coming in 2014 (selected by 31 percent of respondents). Only 5 percent of the group reported no plans for 100G, although 19 percent selected "2016 or beyond."

Excerpt 2: Operator Timelines for Wide-Scale Metro 100G Deployments

Source: Heavy Reading; N=112

REPORT SCOPE & STRUCTURE

‘Metro Packet-Optical Transport 2.0: A Heavy Reading Survey Analysis’ is structured as follows:

Section I is an introduction to the report, with complete report key findings.

Section II provides a detailed analysis of the Heavy Reading metro packet-optical transport survey results.

We organize the survey analysis into the following sections:

  • Drivers and Applications
  • Features and Functions
  • Adoption Timelines
  • Packet-Optical Control Plane
  • Vendor Leadership

Section III profiles the major P-OTS suppliers. We include profiles of 11 suppliers tracked by Heavy Reading in the Packet-Enabled Optical Networking Quarterly Market Tracker, with the addition of carrier Ethernet supplier Juniper Networks (which scored highly in this survey).

Section IV provides a copy of Heavy Reading's Fall 2012 Metro Packet-Optical Transport Survey questionnaire in its entirety.

‘Metro Packet-Optical Transport 2.0: A Heavy Reading Survey Analysis’ is published in PDF format.

Table of Contents

LIST OF FIGURES

I. INTRODUCTION & KEY FINDINGS

  • 1.1. Key Findings
  • 1.2. Report Scope & Structure
  • 1.3. Survey Methodology

II. SURVEY ANALYSIS

  • 2.1. Definitions
  • 2.2. Drivers & Applications
  • 2.3. Features & Functions
  • 2.4. Adoption Timelines
  • 2.5. Packet-Optical Control Plane
  • 2.6. Vendor Leadership

III. VENDOR PROFILES

  • 3.1. Adtran
  • 3.2. Alcatel-Lucent
  • 3.3. Ciena
  • 3.4. Cisco Systems
  • 3.5. Cyan
  • 3.6. ECI Telecom
  • 3.7. Ericsson
  • 3.8. Fujitsu
  • 3.9. Huawei
  • 3.10. Juniper Networks
  • 3.11. Tejas Networks
  • 3.12. Tellabs

APPENDIX A: METRO PACKET-OPTICAL TRANSPORT SURVEY TEXT

APPENDIX B: ABOUT THE AUTHOR

APPENDIX C: LEGAL DISCLAIMER

LIST OF FIGURES

SECTION - I

  • Figure 1.1: Metro Optical Revenue by Segment, 2010-2016
  • Figure 1.2: Respondents by Service Provider Type
  • Figure 1.3: Respondent Involvement in Planning/Purchasing
  • Figure 1.4: Respondents by Job Function
  • Figure 1.5: Respondent Breakout by Geographic Location
  • Figure 1.6: Respondent Breakout by Company Annual Revenue
  • Figure 1.7: Respondent Breakout by Department

SECTION - II

  • Figure 2.1: Annual Growth in Traffic Volume on Metro Networks
  • Figure 2.2: Annual Growth in Traffic Volume on Metro Networks - North America
  • Figure 2.3: Annual Growth in Traffic Volume on Metro Networks - Europe
  • Figure 2.4: Annual Growth in Traffic Volume on Metro Networks - Asia/Pacific
  • Figure 2.5: Annual Growth in Traffic Volume on Metro Networks - Rest of World
  • Figure 2.6: Applications Drivers for Metro P-OTS in Next One to Three Years
  • Figure 2.7: Drivers for Switched OTN in Metro Core/Aggregation Networks
  • Figure 2.8: Interfaces Used Today on Metro Packet-Optical Systems
  • Figure 2.9: Share of Metro P-OTS Predominantly Doing Native Packet Transport
  • Figure 2.10: Converged P-OTS Handle Packets as Well as Purpose-Built Packet Switches
  • Figure 2.11: Most Important Differentiating Features in Metro Packet Optical Transport
  • Figure 2.12: Feature Priorities for Next-Gen Metro Transport Elements
  • Figure 2.13: Preferred Means of Metro Packet Transport in Three to Five Years
  • Figure 2.14: Operator TDM to Packet/Ethernet Migration Plans in One to Three Years
  • Figure 2.15: Operator TDM to Packet/Ethernet Migration Plans in Three to Five Years
  • Figure 2.16: Operator Timelines for Wide-Scale Metro 100G Deployments
  • Figure 2.17: Operator Timelines for Wide-Scale Switched OTN in Metro Networks
  • Figure 2.18: Biggest Driver for Automated/Dynamic Control Plane in Metro Networks
  • Figure 2.19: Metro Elements Targeted for Automated/Dynamic Control Plane Operations
  • Figure 2.20: Worldwide Metro P-OTS Technology & Innovation Leaders
  • Figure 2.21: North America - Metro P-OTS Technology & Innovation Leaders
  • Figure 2.22: Europe - Metro P-OTS Technology & Innovation Leaders
  • Figure 2.23: Asia/Pacific - Metro P-OTS Technology & Innovation Leaders
  • Figure 2.24: Rest of World - Metro P-OTS Technology & Innovation Leaders

SECTION - III

METRO P-OTS EQUIPMENT VENDORS PROFILED

  • Adtran Inc. (Nasdaq: ADTN)
  • Alcatel-Lucent (NYSE: ALU)
  • Ciena Corp. (Nasdaq: CIEN)
  • Cisco Systems Inc. (Nasdaq: CSCO)
  • Cyan Optics Inc.
  • ECI Telecom Ltd.
  • Ericsson AB (Nasdaq: ERICY)
  • Fujitsu Ltd. (TSE: 6702; Pink Sheets: FJTSY)
  • Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd.
  • Juniper Networks Inc. (Nasdaq: JNPR)
  • Tejas Networks Ltd.
  • Tellabs Inc. (Nasdaq: TLAB)
Back to Top