Fujitsu Introduces FLASHWAVE 9500, Joins the Packet Optical Networking Fray

| June 6, 2007 | Optical Infrastructure | Competitive Intelligence Report

| Analyst: Jason Marcheck

Current Perspective: Positive
Vendor Importance: Very High
Market Impact: High

Event Summary

June 4, 2007 – Fujitsu Network Communications announced the Packet Optical Networking Platform (Packet ONP), which is designed to provide integrated Ethernet, ROADM and SONET transport technologies into a single network element. The Packet ONP capabilities will be integrated into the FLASHWAVE 9500 platform. One of the key differentiators specified by FNC is a universal switch fabric that is designed to support both TDM and packet switching in their native formats. No G.A. date was specified.

Analytical Summary

• Current Perspective: Positive on Fujitsu Network Communications’ (FNC) introduction of the FLASHWAVE 9500 Packet Optical Networking Platform (FW 9500 Packet ONP). Arguably late to the market in supporting packet capabilities in its optical portfolio, Fujitsu’s new platform addresses packet-centric switching and transport in a dense form factor that should position the vendor to tap new market opportunities. At the same time, the platform’s capabilities are not exactly novel (as the vendor is trying to claim), which could lead carriers to question what took Fujitsu so long to address a trend that has been developing for some time.

• Vendor Importance: Very high to FNC, because the vendor had fallen behind most of its competitors in addressing packet capabilities in its optical networking portfolio. The FLASHWAVE 9500 appears to offer a full-featured packet optical solution in a space-conserving package; providing the proverbial “bang for the buck” that will appeal to operators looking to conserve OpEx while migrating network capabilities to better support Ethernet services. However, as a relative latecomer, the onus remains on FNC to prove that its new offer delivers value ways that market-ready competing products do not.

• Market Impact: High on the optical infrastructure market, because FNC is a well established competitor in the North American market (where the FW 9500 Packet ONP is primarily aimed), with strong ties to Tier 1 customers in the region. As such, FNC has the advantage of existing sales channels through which to push its new product; a factor that could easily help the vendor overcome any “late to market” charges that competitors will undoubtedly level. That said, there is no denying that the FW 9500 Packet ONP is, for now, an unproven commodity; meaning the product must prove its mettle before any carrier will rush to deploy it.

Recommended Competitor Actions

• Alcatel-Lucent should point out that universal switch fabric (i.e., the feature FNC is identifying as one of the FW 9500 Packet ONP’s primary differentiators) has been generally available in the 1850 TSS for more than a year. Going further, while FNC’s product has yet to be proven, the 1850 TSS can point to more than 50 public references involving tests, trials, and/or deployments.

• Cisco should point out that its Ethernet Xponder cards allow operators to introduce Ethernet aggregation capabilities into their metro optical transport platforms by deploying a blade in an existing chassis. Thus, Cisco can make the case that its solution holds far more significant CapEx and OpEx advantages compared to a solution that mandates the deployment of an entirely new network element.

• Ciena should contend that its FlexSelect architecture is a much more credible solution for carriers looking to introduce packet optical capabilities into their optical transport networks. While FNC has not even commented on when the FW 9500 Packet ONP will be available, the CN 4200 has already been deployed with more than 65 customers.

• Tellabs should point out that its DynamicHome solution contains not only the Ethernet capabilities that carriers require to build next-gen triple play networks, but also features GPON access platform capabilities that FNC has had almost no success delivering via its FW 6100 platform. Going further, with respect to mobile backhaul, Tellabs can claim its long-standing history of working with wireless operators makes it a much more capable partner than FNC.

• Nortel should claim that it not only has more than a year-long head start on delivering packet optical capabilities via its Provider Backbone Transport solution, but that its solution is the driving force behind BT’s decision to adopt PBT in the 21CN project. As such, while FNC might claim to have the capabilities to support any form of connection oriented Ethernet solution that carriers might want, the fact is that FNC is trying to play catch-up with the market, rather than lead with innovative solutions.

Recommended End User / Customer Actions

• Carriers need to demand additional details on FNC’s universal switch fabric innovation, and call for proof points to validate those capabilities. Switching TDM and packet traffic in their native formats, within the same switch fabric is by no means common. Instead, it is built on novel and somewhat untested technology. Before carriers take the capabilities of the FW 9500 Packet ONP for granted, they must place the onus on FNC to validate its claims for the new platform.

• Existing customers that want to add Ethernet aggregation capabilities into their metro optical networks, without deploying a whole new box, should require FNC to come up with a blade solution for the FLASHWAVE line of MSPP products. By itself, Ethernet aggregation holds tremendous value to emerging IPTV and 3G mobile backhaul solutions. Toward that end, access to those capabilities without having to invest in all of the other technology included in the FW 9500 Packet ONP might make sense to many current and prospective FNC customers.

• Carriers need to seek additional details from FNC on when the FW 9500 Packet ONP will be generally available. For the most part, many Tier-1 carriers have been evaluating packet optical solutions for some time. As such, for carriers that are anxious to implement packet optical capabilities into their networks, they need to know when they can kick the tires on the FNC solution.

• Would-be Alcatel-Lucent customers should use FNC’s announcement negotiating leverage in 1850 TSS contract talks. While Alcatel-Lucent can credibly argue that its solution provides a more mature, field tested solution, the fact is that FNC’s claims of a universal switch fabric match what until now has been a unique feature of the 1850 TSS. If FNC’s FW 9500 Packet ONP can deliver the same capabilities as the 1850 TSS, in a similar timeframe, then carriers should consider the merits of the FNC offer as a potential substitute.

Top