Read more:http://mpls-tp.com/difference-between-mpls-mpls-tp/#ixzz30f7WrP6IFollow us:@MPLS_TP on Twitter

The basic difference between the two is that MPLS must have a control plane protocol, but in case of MPLS-TP the control plane protocol is not a must. This creates a big advantage in the fast convergence.MPLS is uni-directional whereas MPLS-TP is bi-directionalSwitching time and recovery in MPLS-TP must be within 50ms in both 1+1 and 1:1 protection schemes (this is achieved using FDD/CV with 3.3ms). But in MPLS this is all related to IGP

RFC 5654 is all aboutrequirements of MPLS-TP. But what is the difference between MPLS and MPLS-TP and how operators can useMPLS-TPin lieu of legacy SDH/SONET networks.1. MPLS requires a control plane protocol and but in case of MPLS-TP no control plane protocol is required. The reason for selecting no control plane protocol is only for the fast convergence and removing any kind of dependencies.2. MPLS is uni directional where as MPLS-TP is bi-directional.3. MPLS is having inband OAM where as in MPLS-TP out of band OAM is available.4. No separation of control and data plane where as in MPLS-TP MUST support the logical separation of the control and management planes from the data plane5. MPLS-TP 1+1 and 1:1 protection in a ring MUST support switching ime within 50 ms from the moment of fault detection in a network with a 16-node ring with less than 1200 km of fiber but in MPLS all dependent of IGP.

use theInternet Protocol(IP), which significantly reduces cost and complexity.A decade ago,Multiprotocol Label Switching(MPLS) emerged as another unifying technology. Forwarding most packets atLayer 2, MPLS allowed service providers to build large-scale IP-based networks that supported traffic engineering, connection-oriented packet transport andvirtual private networks(VPNs), features that were hard or impossible to implement with native IP. The widespread deployment of MPLS andCarrier Ethernetcaused transmission price-per-bit to drop by orders of magnitude and putframe relayandasynchronous transfer mode(ATM) on the endangered technologies list.Encouraged by the rapid uptake and enormous success of MPLS in the IP world, vendors tried to apply the same principles to transport andoptical networksoptical networks. They tried to unifySynchronous Digital Hierarchy(SDH),optical transport network(OTN), anddense wave division multiplexing(DWDM), and developedGeneric MPLS(GMPLS), which so far has been a failure. The mentality of transport network operators is obviously incompatible with the connectionless unpredictable self-adjusting world of IP.Standards groups to bring Layer 2 features to MPLS-TPIn 2006, the International Telecommunication Union standardization sector (ITU-T) decided to merge the same architectural principles used in transport network technologies like SDH, SONET and OTN with MPLS. The ITU tried to recycle GMPLS into its own MPLS-like technology called Transport-MPLS (T-MPLS).Fortunately, the ITU's development efforts were quickly stopped, and the development ofMPLS Transport Profile(MPLS-TP) continues as a jointInternet Engineering Task Force (IETF)/ITU effort.The first result of the joint effort had alist of 115 requirementsthat identified MPLS-TP-specific requirements in six major areas. Some of these requirements specify the mandatory or recommended use of existing MPLS technologies or components, but many require new functionality and significant reworking of existing MPLS control and management protocols(see below).Even though MPLS-TP requires significant deviation from the traditional MPLS model and a lot of standardization work, the first requests for comments (RFCs) have just started to emerge. The expected payoffs, which include unified technology, reduced transport network complexity and associated cost reductions, have clearly excited service providers. If successful, MPLS-TP will give service providers unified network management and provisioning, and single packet switching technology they will be able to use across numerous transport networks, thus reducing the total cost of ownership.Breaking down the differences between MPLS and MPLS-TPWhen it comes to the major differences between MPLS and MPLS-TP, here's what you need to know. Bidirectional Label Switched Paths (LSPs).MPLS is based on the traditional IP routing paradigm -- traffic from A to B can flow over different paths than traffic from B to A. But transport networks commonly use bidirectional circuits, and MPLS-TP also mandates the support of bidirectional LSPs (a path through an MPLS network). In addition, MPLS-TP must support point-to-multipoint paths. Management plane LSP setup.Paths across MPLS networks are set up with control-plane protocols (IP routing protocols orResource Reservation Protocol(RSVP) forMPLS Traffic Engineering (MPLS-TE). MPLS-TP could use the same path setup mechanisms as MPLS (control plane-based LSP setup) or the traditional transport network approach where the paths are configured from the central network management system (management plane LSP setup). MORE MPLS AND MPLS-TP RESOURCESAsk our Expert: How willMPLS-TP interact with MPLSin the future?

Telecom Insightsguide: Metro network trends include focus onMPLS-TP

Speaking of differences, how isMPLS different from plain old IP? Control plane is not mandatory.Going a step farther, MPLS-TP nodes should be able to work with no control plane, with paths across the network computed solely by the network management system and downloaded into the network elements. Out-of-band management.MPLS nodes usually use in-band management or at least in-band exchange of control-plane messages. MPLS-TP network elements have to support out-of-band management over a dedicated management network (similar to the way some transport networks are managed today). Total separation of management/control and data plane.Data forwarding within an MPLS-TP network element must continue even if its management or control plane fails. High-end routers provide similar functionality with non-stop forwarding, but this kind of functionality was never mandatory in traditional MPLS. No IP in the forwarding plane.MPLS nodes usually run IP on all interfaces because they have to support the in-band exchange of control-plane messages. MPLS-TP network elements must be able to run without IP in the forwarding plane. Explicit support of ring topologies.Many transport networks usering topologiesto reduce complexity. MPLS-TP thus includes mandatory support for numerous ring-specific mechanisms.