Menu
T-MPLS versus PBT: Picking a technology

T-MPLS versus PBT: Picking a technology

Carriers building IP-based next-generation network infrastructures are faced with the tough task of guaranteeing service levels and uptime requirements in a huge, global, but less-than-deterministic network environment.

To address this shortcoming of IP, carriers are examining two primary technologies: Transport Multi-protocol Label Switching (T-MPLS) and Nortel's Provider Backbone Transport (PBT). PBT also is called Provider Backbone Bridging-Traffi c Engineering (PBB-TE) within the IEEE.

PBT is an Ethernet derivative intended to bring connection-oriented characteristics and deterministic behaviour to Ethernet. It turns off Ethernet's Spanning Tree and media-access-control address-flooding and learning characteristics. That lets Ethernet behave more like a traditional carrier transport technology.

The key selling factor in its favour compared to TMPLS, the traffic-oriented version of MPLS, is that it's based on Ethernet and can be implemented via switches, obviating the need for more costly MPLS-aware routers.

Unfortunately for PBT, it's relatively new and untried, whereas MPLS has been around for 10 years and has the backing of the major router vendors including Cisco.

"If you look at the difference between PBT and TMPLS, you could make an argument that they provide almost identical features and capabilities," president of technology assessment firm CIMI, Thomas Nolle, said.

"But PBT equipment is 33 per cent cheaper. So the carriers are saying, 'Wait a minute. If I can get the same thing for less money, then why do I need the IP routing part?' And that's where the router guys are increasingly on the defensive."


Follow Us

Join the newsletter!

Error: Please check your email address.
Show Comments