will be much cheaper. Distributed control plane functionality has SO far not been defined for PBB-TE Table 7.6 PBB-TE VS. MPLS-TP Attribute PBB-TE MPLS-TP Scalability Offers more bandwidth per base station Offers more bandwidth per base station when compared to SONET/SDH. when compared to SONET/SDH Service Provisioning For higher rate of change of connection For lower rate of change of connection (service flows) PBB-TE is better than (service flows) MPLS-TP is better than MPLS-TP PBB-TE Delay Profile PBB-TE has a better delay profile than MPLS-TP is better with larger number of MPLS-TP for lower node-counts node-counts. Control and Management Distributed control plane functionality is Distributed control plane functionality is not defined yet not defined yet Peering PBB-TE can take advantage of Ethernet MPLS based peering agreements between Network-to-Network Interface (NNI) carriers has rarely been observed developed by MEF for carrier peering Interoperability PBB-TE has complete interoperability MPLS-TP is expected to use existing MPLS with installed base of Ethernet bridges standards. Its mechanisms are expected to interoperate with existing IETF MPLS and IETF PWE3 control and data planes Comply with CE OAM functionalities Comply with CE OAM functionalities Client Layers Ethernet TDM, ATM, IP, MPLS, Ethernet Ethernet is cheaper; CAPEX wise Routers are expensive SO the green field PBB-TE will be 30 to 40% economical deployment will be expensive, but than MPLS-TP (green field deployment) MPLS-TP will provide a cheaper upgrade path from the existing MPLS network than PBB-TE Standard June 2009 2010/2011 Next Generation Mobile Communications Ecosystem Point-to-Multipoint EVC Figure 7.21 E-Line service using point-to-point EVC. Reproduced from © 2008 Metro Ethernet Forum [37] and MPLS-TP, although IETF and IEEE work is in progress with respect to this issue. Lastly, MPLS-TP has a wider industry support than PBB-TE [12]. 7.4.2.3.10 CE Service Types The MEF has currently defined three Ethernet service types to make it