As symbolized at the recent EANTC interoperability testing event, Aviat microwave radios can help solve the complexity and scalability problems of Carrier Ethernet technology.
Carrier Ethernet (CE) transport networks are growing in both scale and complexity, requiring both vendors and operators to deliver solutions to sustain their growth. To help address this, Aviat Networks recently participated in the European Advanced Networking Testing Center’s (EANTC) annual multi-vendor interoperability testing event to validate several aspects of scaling CE networks, among other things.
Increasing CE network sizes increase the complexity of management—especially from a services perspective—when CE services span multiple network domains. The ability to partition management domains and effectively manage alarms that accurately identify and propagate notification of network faults, dramatically speeds up the fault isolation and resolution process across large networks. Utilizing and effectively implementing “Hierarchical Service OAM” in growing CE networks is valuable to overcoming this challenge and was a key area of the recent interoperability testing.
Another critical aspect of growth is dealing with multi-technology—not just multi-vendor—interoperability. As CE networks scale, there is an increasing mix of Ethernet switching, MPLS and, most recently, MPLS-TP internetworking emerging. One potentially complex area that was also tested was validating the operation and survivability of intersecting Ethernet and MPLS-TP rings in a multi-homed topology. The “ERPSv2 and VPLS Interworking” test validated that standards-based G.8032 Ethernet protected rings and MPLS-TP VPLS rings can interoperate, or more significantly “co-operate,” to allow complex multi-technology networks to deliver reliable end-to-end services.
To learn about these aspects of scaling and dealing with complex CE networks check out the EANTC white paper for more details.
Sr. Product and Solutions Marketing Manager
- Differences Between VPLS and MPLS (differencebetween.net)
- World first for Australian Carrier—MEF certification for MW (vertel.com.au)
- LTE – Lessons Learned So Far (aviatnetworks.com)
- Wrap Up of Carrier Ethernet World Asia Pacific (aviatnetworks.com)
- Aviat Networks Partners with AT&T Government Solutions for Department of Homeland Security Business (virtual-strategy.com)
Horn antennas on the roof of a microwave relay station near Madison St. and 17th Ave, Capitol Hill, Seattle, Washington State, USA. (Photo credit: Vladimir Menkov via Wikipedia)
Between any two microwave radio antennas, there is one direct ray and multiple refractive/ reflective multi-path rays. In the eighth and last installment of our Radio Head Technology Series, Aviat Networks Principal Engineer and master storyteller, Dick Laine, relates how restrictive tower rules for San Francisco’s historic China Basin Building required fine adjustments of a horn antenna to resolve reflective rays from the surrounding bay.
As Dick tells it, to accommodate a Space Diversity arrangement, one horn antenna on the building had to be hung upside down. During the installation process, the alignment for the upside-down diversity antenna created a reflection point 3 miles out into the bay. Because of this installation, the performance was horrible, but at the time no one knew why. For example, when a little speedboat or anything larger went through the reflection point, there would be an outage as the signal was interrupted. There did not seem to be an obvious fix to the alignment issue. The horn antenna did not have a way to check the alignment on the horizontal with a bubble level.
To find out how Dick solved this antenna mystery, register for the Radio Head series (it’s free). Then to put it all in context, Dick goes over Huygens’ Principle as it applies to microwave signal diffraction. And if you ever wondered what happened to periscope antennas, Dick provides some key insight! Tune in to find out!
- The Truth About Terahertz (spectrum.ieee.org)
- GL Conveys the Availability of RF Design Tools (virtual-strategy.com)
- FCC Rule Changes Lower the Cost of Microwave Deployments (aviatnetworks.com)
- Why Bigger is not Always Better for Mobile Backhaul! (aviatnetworks.com)
- Got Protection? Diversity Schemes and Other Methods (aviatnetworks.com)
- Cole Valley Cell Tower Authorization Approved By Planning Commission (tantek.com)
Aviat Networks’ Packet Node IRU600 is an example of an all-indoor microwave radio, which is one choice wireless operators should consider for implementations in North America.
There’s a lot of buzz in the microwave industry about the trend toward all-outdoor radios, but those who haven’t been through LTE deployments may be surprised to learn that based on our experience deploying LTE backhaul for some of the world’s largest LTE networks, all-indoor is actually the best radio architecture for LTE backhaul.
We can debate today’s LTE backhaul capacity requirements, but one thing we do know is that with new advances in LTE technology, the capacity needed is going to grow. This means that microwave radios installed for backhaul will likely have to be upgraded with more capacity over time. Although people are experimenting with compression techniques and very high QAM modulations and other capacity extension solutions, the most proven way to expand capacity is to add radio channels because it represents real usable bandwidth independent of packet sizes, traffic mix and the RF propagation environment.
All-indoor radios are more expensive initially in terms of capital expenditures, but they’re cheaper to expand and (as electronics are accessible without tower climb) are more easily serviced. While an outdoor radio connects to the antenna with Ethernet or coax cable, indoor radios usually need a more expensive waveguide to carry the RF signal from the radio to the antenna. So you pay more up front with an all-indoor radio but as the radio’s capacity grows you save money. There are several reasons.
When everything related to the radio is indoors, you just have a waveguide and an antenna up on the tower. To add radio channels with an all-indoor radio you go into the cabinet and add an RF unit. With an outdoor radio, you have to climb the tower, which can cost as much as $10,000. Also, when you add a new outdoor RF unit you may have to swap out the antenna for a larger one due to extra losses incurred by having to combine radio channels on tower….(read the full story at RCR Wireless).
Senior Product Marketing Manager
- Microwave Backhaul for Public Safety LTE (aviatnetworks.com)
- Sprint: Ethernet backhaul gives us 20 times more bandwidth (fiercebroadbandwireless.com)
- Microwave Wireless Backhaul Case Study: Tooele County (Utah) (aviatnetworks.com)
- Construction, Not Capacity, is the Real LTE Challenge in U.S. (aviatnetworks.com)
- Worldwide Survey Finds Mobile Operators Aren’t fully Benefitting from the Value of IP/Ethernet Backhaul Architectures (infovista.com)