Rich: A recent Frost and Sullivan survey states that 75% of CEOs are planning to grow their businesses through geographic expansion. As a former senior telecom executive currently involved in network communications and security, how do you see the industry responding these new demands on network services?

Mike: The Frost and Sullivan report is very interesting and points directly to the big issue most SMB CEOs are facing. They need to expand, yet it is critical to control the costs associated with expansion. The big concern centers around all of the hidden or creeping expenses typical of building networks. It appears the message has not yet connected that there already is a solution that can provide a simple, more secure and efficient network using the public network. The public network is basically a mirror of the so-called private networks that the big telecoms sell, however, it can be much more secure -- and if implemented corporate-wide -- can offer significant savings that can then be used to support expansion needs, such as hiring the right people and resourcing them correctly.


Rich: The current shift to MPLS is similar to the private line to Frame Relay paradigm shift. Do you see the same business impact?

Mike: The initial move to frame relay offered technology benefits along with a tremendous price advantage. However, it was cost savings alone that began the great push to virtual data networks which is not the case with today’s MPLS migrations. Back then, security was not as much of an issue as it is today, and this is something that companies must consider since there are no real security benefits associated with MPLS. The promise of QoS will add minimal benefit since there are no real cost reductions. Certainly, the SMB market will see no real impact.


Rich: More specifically, how do you see small and medium size businesses being impacted by the march to MPLS?

Mike: The SMB market will see increased cost with no real efficiencies gained. The complexities around supporting a router-based network will create higher demand for increasing staff to support users in branch offices, retail sites and even home offices -- complexities that small and midsize companies need to think twice about prior to moving to MPLS. Having been in Telecom for many years, I can tell you that many companies were convinced to buy into solutions that exceeded their needs.


Rich: The amount of business being conducted over the Internet from small offices and home offices is increasing dramatically. Will these SOHO’s benefit from MPLS?

Mike: MPLS reflects a pre-internet model for corporate WAN connectivity. MPLS has no concept of mobility, for instance, which we now take for granted in our daily business lives. MPLS is neither appropriate nor economical for SOHO because it requires its own dedicated local loop. Internet-based access is far more economical for SOHO because of shared local loop technology (e.g. DSL and cable) and multiple application sharing. And it makes an ideal cost-effective solution for offsite storage and disaster recovery.



Rich: What role does quality of service (QoS) play as the major carriers move their customers to MPLS?

Mike: QoS management is a built-in feature of MPLS and is often mentioned as a primary justification to use MPLS for QoS sensitive applications like voice-over IP. QoS can constrain packet loss and latency as well as jitter (moment to moment variability of latency) to application acceptable levels. However, fewer applications need QoS than in the past. Even VoIP systems have better codecs that can compensate for poor QoS and still deliver acceptable service. If you have ever used Skype, you know that voice over the Internet can be acceptable even over intercontinental distances. Also, Internet bandwidth is increasingly less expensive. Excess bandwidth can eliminate many of the congestion-induced problems commonly addressed by QoS schemes. The bottom line is that the QoS focus lives on as an over-hyped feature primarily used by carriers to justify premium pricing.


Rich: Will MPLS solutions resolve the security breaches that seem to be reported on a regular basis?

Mike: MPLS is thought to provide closed networks. But, MPLS has no “security” features per se. For instance, it does not provide end-to-end encryption and therefore does not protect privacy of information. Many companies are already adding encryption devices to secure MPLS, but the impact is increased cost, added management complexity and reduced throughput for existing voice and data traffic. These are several of the reasons we are seeing tremendous adoption of Blue Ridge Networks Secure Virtual Ethernet Services (SVES) which already provides the gold-standard for security, and its Layer 2 architecture creates operational efficiencies that allow our customers to execute MACDs overnight rather than the weeks and months associated with MPLS. And, believe it or not, at a cost that is 80% less than MPLS managed networks.

Click here to learn more about Blue Ridge/Secure Virtual Ethernet Service