MSIL TECHNICAL CONSULTATION 28 February 2006 Steve Wright The information in this presentation relates to plans currently under development and subject to consultation, and may be subject to change. Detailed implementation depends upon a number of factors including the capabilities of suppliers and the final 21CN network design.

Responses Responses received from 5 CP’s. Thank you C&W Gamma Kingston Global Crossing Thus

Ethernet Bandwidths required – 100 to 1000M Interface GE The bandwidth flexibility and low cost associated with Ethernet makes it the preferred technology for derived services provisioned across the interconnect

SDH/PPC  SDH well-established operations and maintenance functions that are inherent both in the technology itself and the operational procedures adopted by Communications Providers  GFP and VCAS are widely accepted methods of transporting Ethernet over SDH  VC3 will not be possible on FM  Current MSAN does not support VC3 GFP/SDH

WDM CWDM and DWDM required Scalable bandwidth Clear demarcation / physical security between individual channel Flexibility in service types – potentially any bit rate service can be catered for Low latency WDM ISH would be the most desirable option, however there will be a number of standardisation issues (see below) that would need to be addressed.

Interconnect POH/POSH Preference to Metro nodes Preference to CSI / ISI

Conclusion Three products required:  Ethernet 1G  SDH/PPC STM1 – STM16 GFP/VCAT (Ethernet)  WDM Ethernet 1G and 10G SDH STM1 – STM64  Need to state which products/services will be supported by MSIL  Protected and unprotected options  Single and Dual fibre working  Physical Traffic separation