UNI and NNI), without requiring manual interven- tion. This means that the cost of setting up a new connection decreases greatly. In this case, the service offer and provisioning processes will change fundamen- tally. Since service delivery will now be automated and executed on the pure machine level, correct agreements and regulations must be negotiated by the sales department and implemented well before in the form of SLAs. The use of GMPLS technologies and the possibility to offer dynamic services are strongly interconnected issues. The strongest impact of dynamic services is on the pricing and billing pro- cess. Fixed price services (e.g., leased lines) will definitely be cheaper in pricing and billing than dynamic services. For dynamic services, it is much more dif- ficult (and thus more expensive) to correctly assign costs to customer accounts. Calculating a new price for a new service is more expensive than just applying a traditional pricing scheme. As a conclusion, provisioning of new services, especially when the setup of a new connection is needed, is quite cheaper both due to the easier process and to the absence of errors due to the elimination of manual operations. On the other hand, the process carried out by the sales department is more complicated and thus more expensive. In analyzing the activity graphs and the related costs, it becomes evident that the greater OPEX cost element is the labor cost and it is also the most impacted by the transition to ASON/GMPLS. Thus we will start our analysis from labor cost. This will be evaluated by detailing exactly the level of personnel that is needed and estimating the labor cost on the average over European nations and over United States. This average is done both using official sta- tistics and doing a set of interviews with carriers to confirm them [29]. Naturally there is a difference between labor cost in Europe and in United States, but the percentage impact ASON/GMPLS is not relevantly different [30,31]. It is natural to divide the carriers in two c