Eduard, you know the answer as well as I do, right :) ? Here's my answer: I think that Cisco can only estimate (let's not say speculate, it has pretty bad connotations) what comes out of access networks.
No offence meant, I hope none is taken. Cheers, Etienne On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 3:47 PM Vasilenko Eduard < vasilenko.edu...@huawei.com> wrote: > Hi Etienne, > > Look carefully what you have shown to me. It is a only speculation again > (“predictions”). It is just a table with a collection of all predictions in > the past. Moreover, averaged between years. > > I was asking for real data from the past 5 years. Are you sure that VNI > has it? > > > > If you would find real historical data in VNI, then we would be capable to > check the table that you have shown: was the guessing right? > > I strongly suspect an answer. > > > > Eduard > > *From:* Etienne-Victor Depasquale [mailto:ed...@ieee.org] > *Sent:* Thursday, May 11, 2023 2:46 PM > *To:* Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.edu...@huawei.com> > *Cc:* Dave Taht <dave.t...@gmail.com>; Phil Bedard <bedard.p...@gmail.com>; > NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> > *Subject:* Re: Routed optical networks > > > > To clarify the table I linked to in the previous email: > > > > Cisco estimates IP traffic exchanged over the access network by both > businesses and consumers with: > > > • endpoints over managed networks and > • endpoints over unmanaged networks (“Internet traffic”). > > > Both the mobile access network and the fixed access network are > considered. > > > > Cisco considers IP traffic over managed networks to be characterized by > passage through a single service provider. > > Without explicitly referring to quality of service (QoS), > > the implication is clearly that the traffic is controlled to meet the QoS > demanded by the service level agreement (SLA). > > > > In contrast, “Internet traffic” crosses provider domains; > > typically, this traffic is delivered on the basis of providers’ best > effort. > > These two kinds of traffic complement one another and collectively are > referred to as total global IP traffic. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Etienne > > > > On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 1:37 PM Etienne-Victor Depasquale <ed...@ieee.org> > wrote: > > Historically, this is what VNI has claimed > <https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JUG70rbZfaVHC3Z2HrECMOXJ2OnmtuxV/view?usp=sharing> > . > > > > Cheers, > > > Etienne > > > > On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 1:25 PM Vasilenko Eduard < > vasilenko.edu...@huawei.com> wrote: > > I did investigate traffic for every Carrier while dealing with it as a > consultant (repeated many dozens of times). > > I have seen over a decade how traffic growth dropped year-over-year (from > 60% to 25% in 2019 when I dropped this activity in 2020 – covid blocked > travel). > > Sometimes I talk to old connections and they confirm that it is even less > now. > > In rear cases, It is typically possible to find this information on the > public Internet (I remember the case when Google disclosed traffic for > Pakistan at the conference with the explanation that 30% is attributed to > new subscribers, and an additional +30% is to more heavy content per > subscriber). > > But mostly, it was confidential information from a discussion with > Carriers – they all know very well their traffic growth. > > In general, traffic stat is pretty confidential. I did not have the > motivation to aggregate it. > > > > Sandvine is not representative of global traffic because DPI is installed > mostly for Mobiles. But Mobile subscriber is 10x less than fixed on traffic > – it is not the biggest source. Moreover, Mobiles would look better growing > because the limiting factor was on technology (5G proposed more than 4G, 4G > proposed much more than 3G) – it would probably would less disruptive in > the future. > > Fixed Carriers do not pay DPI premiums. And rarely share their traffic > publicly. Sandvine could not see it. > > > > VNI is claiming so many things. Please show where exactly they show > traffic growth (I am not interested in prediction speculations). Is it > possible to understand CAGR for the 5 last years? Is it declining or > growing? (traffic itself is for sure still growing) > > > > Of course, the disruption could come at any year and add a new S-curve > (Metaverse?). But disruption is by definition not predictable. > > > > PS: Everything above and below in this thread is just my personal opinion. > > > > Eduard > > *From:* Etienne-Victor Depasquale [mailto:ed...@ieee.org] > *Sent:* Thursday, May 11, 2023 12:48 PM > *To:* Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.edu...@huawei.com> > *Cc:* Dave Taht <dave.t...@gmail.com>; Phil Bedard <bedard.p...@gmail.com>; > NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> > *Subject:* Re: Routed optical networks > > > > Eduard, academics cite the VNI (and the Sandvine Global reports). > > > > Do you know of alternative sources that show traffic growth data you're > more comfortable with? > > > > Cheers, > > > > Etienne > > > > On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 9:34 AM Vasilenko Eduard < > vasilenko.edu...@huawei.com> wrote: > > But it is speculation, not a trend yet. > > I remember 10y ago every presentation started from the claim that 100B of > IoT would drive XXX traffic. It did not happen. > > Now we see presentations that AI would be talking to AI that generates > YYYY traffic. > > Maybe some technology would push traffic next S-curve, maybe not. It is > still speculation. > > > > The traffic growth was stimulated (despite all VNIs) by 1) new > subscribers, 2) video quality for subscribers. Nothing else yet. > > It is almost finished for both trends. We are close to the plateau of > these S-curves. > > For some years (2013-2020) I was carefully looking at numbers for many > countries: it was always possible to split CAGR for these 2 components. The > video part was extremely consistent between countries. The subscriber part > was 100% proportional to subscriber CAGR. > > Everything else up to now was “marketing” to say it mildly. > > > > Reminder: nothing in nature could grow indefinitely. The limit always > exists. It is only a question of when. > > > > PS: Of course, marketing people could draw you any traffic growth – it > depends just on the marketing budget. > > > > Eduard > > *From:* Dave Taht [mailto:dave.t...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 9, 2023 11:41 PM > *To:* Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.edu...@huawei.com> > *Cc:* Phil Bedard <bedard.p...@gmail.com>; Etienne-Victor Depasquale < > ed...@ieee.org>; NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> > *Subject:* Re: Routed optical networks > > > > Up until this moment I was feeling that my take on the decline of traffic > growth was somewhat isolated, in that I have long felt that we are nearing > the top of the S curve of the data we humans can create and consume. About > the only source of future traffic growth I can think of comes from getting > more humans online, and that is a mere another doubling. > > > > On the other hand, predictions such as 640k should be enough for everyone > did not pan out. > > > > On the gripping hand, there has been an explosion of LLM stuff of late, > with enormous models being widely distributed in just the past month: > > > > https://lwn.net/Articles/930939/ > > > > Could the AIs takeoff lead to a resumption of traffic growth? I still > don´t think so... > > > > > > On Thu, May 4, 2023 at 10:59 PM Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG < > nanog@nanog.org> wrote: > > Disclaimer: Metaverse has not changed Metro traffic yet. Then … > > > > I am puzzled when people talk about 400GE and Tbps in the Mero context. > > For historical reasons, Metro is still about 2*2*10GE (one “2” for > redundancy, another “2” for capacity) in the majority of cases worldwide. > > How many BRASes serve more than 40000/1.5=27k users in the busy hour? > > It means that 50GE is the best interface now for the majority of cases. > 2*50GE=100Gbps is good room for growth. > > Of course, exceptions could be. I know BRAS that handles 86k subscribers > (do not recommend anybody to push the limits – it was so painful). > > > > We have just 2 eyes and look at video content about 22h per week (on > average). Our eyes do not permit us to see resolution better than > particular for chosen distance (4k for typical TV, HD for smartphones, and > so on). Color depth 10bits is enough for the majority, 12bits is sure > enough for everybody. 120 frames/sec is enough for everybody. It would > never change – it is our genetics. > > Fortunately for Carriers, the traffic has a limit. You have probably seen > that every year traffic growth % is decreasing. The Internet is stabilizing > and approaching the plateau. > > How much growth is still awaiting us? 1.5? 1.4? It needs separate > research. The result would be tailored for whom would pay for the research. > > IMHO: It is not mandatory that 100GE would become massive in the metro. (I > know that 100GE is already massive in the DC CLOS) > > > > Additionally, who would pay for this traffic growth? It also limits > traffic at some point. > > I hope it would happen after we would get our 22h/4k/12bit/120hz. > > > > Now, you could argue that Metaverse would jump and multiply traffic by an > additional 2x or 3x. Then 400GE may be needed. > > Sorry, but it is speculation yet. It is not a trend like the current > (declining) traffic growth. > > > > Ed/ > > *From:* NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces+vasilenko.eduard=huawei....@nanog.org] > *On Behalf Of *Phil Bedard > *Sent:* Thursday, May 4, 2023 8:32 PM > *To:* Etienne-Victor Depasquale <ed...@ieee.org>; NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> > *Subject:* Re: Routed optical networks > > > > It’s not necessarily metro specific although the metro networks could lend > themselves to overall optimizations. > > > > The adoption of ZR/ZR+ IPoWDM currently somewhat corresponds with your > adoption of 400G since today they require a QDD port. There are 100G QDD > ports but that’s not all that popular yet. Of course there is work to do > something similar in QSFP28 if the power can be reduced to what is > supported by an existing QSFP28 port in most devices. In larger networks > with higher speed requirements and moving to 400G with QDD, using the DCO > optics for connecting routers is kind of a no-brainer vs. a traditional > muxponder. Whether that’s over a ROADM based optical network or not, > especially at metro/regional distances. > > > > There are very large deployments of IPoDWDM over passive DWDM or dark > fiber for access and aggregation networks where the aggregate required > bandwidth doesn’t exceed the capabilities of those optics. It’s been done > at 10G for many years. With the advent of pluggable EDFA amplifiers, you > can even build links up to 120km* (perfect dark fiber) carrying tens of > terabits of traffic without any additional active optical equipment. > > > > It’s my personal opinion we aren’t to the days yet of where we can simply > build an all packet network with no photonic switching that carries all > services, but eventually (random # of years) it gets there for many > networks. There are also always going to be high performance applications > for transponders where pluggable optics aren’t a good fit. > > > > Carrying high speed private line/wavelength type services as well is a > different topic than interconnecting IP devices. > > > > Thanks, > > Phil > > > > > > *From: *NANOG <nanog-bounces+bedard.phil=gmail....@nanog.org> on behalf > of Etienne-Victor Depasquale via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> > *Date: *Monday, May 1, 2023 at 2:30 PM > *To: *NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> > *Subject: *Routed optical networks > > Hello folks, > > > > Simple question: does "routed optical networks" have a clear meaning in > the metro area context, or not? > > > > Put differently: does it call to mind a well-defined stack of technologies > in the control and data planes of metro-area networks? > > > > I'm asking because I'm having some thoughts about the clarity of this > term, in the process of carrying out a qualitative survey of the results of > the metro-area networks survey. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Etienne > > > > -- > > Ing. Etienne-Victor Depasquale > Assistant Lecturer > Department of Communications & Computer Engineering > Faculty of Information & Communication Technology > University of Malta > > Web. https://www.um.edu.mt/profile/etiennedepasquale > > > > > -- > > Podcast: > https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7058793910227111937/ > > Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos > > > > > -- > > Ing. Etienne-Victor Depasquale > Assistant Lecturer > Department of Communications & Computer Engineering > Faculty of Information & Communication Technology > University of Malta > > Web. https://www.um.edu.mt/profile/etiennedepasquale > > > > > -- > > Ing. Etienne-Victor Depasquale > Assistant Lecturer > Department of Communications & Computer Engineering > Faculty of Information & Communication Technology > University of Malta > > Web. https://www.um.edu.mt/profile/etiennedepasquale > > > > > -- > > Ing. Etienne-Victor Depasquale > Assistant Lecturer > Department of Communications & Computer Engineering > Faculty of Information & Communication Technology > University of Malta > > Web. https://www.um.edu.mt/profile/etiennedepasquale > -- Ing. Etienne-Victor Depasquale Assistant Lecturer Department of Communications & Computer Engineering Faculty of Information & Communication Technology University of Malta Web. https://www.um.edu.mt/profile/etiennedepasquale
