North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: ATM Utility
Also, please also do not confuse Vadim's individual opinion with the opinion of Sprint. Sprint also recognizes the cost-benefits of a fast packet service versus point-to-point circuits. One of the primary reasons we pursued an ATM strategy in advance of many others was due to the cost-benefits in our backbone...There are a litany of other reasons which I would be happy to pontificate...Pushpendra, no criticism intended, but I would probably argue that our stockholders do not consider the cost of additional network capacity as "funny-money".... Bob Doyle Sprint > From: Pushpendra Mohta <[email protected]> > Message-Id: <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: ATM Utility > To: [email protected] (Jon 'Iain' Boone) > Date: Tue, 1 Nov 1994 22:30:14 -0800 (PST) > Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] > In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> > from "Jon 'Iain' Boone" at Nov 1, 94 03:53:24 pm > X-Usmail: CERFnet, P.O. BOX 85608, San Diego, CA 92186-9784 > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Length: 1993 > > Jon 'Iain' Boone writes: > > > > On Mon, 31 Oct 1994, Vadim Antonov wrote: > > > > > >cost-effective in a number of applications today. In particular, > > > >the cost of wide-area DS-3 ATM services can be very attractive > > > >when compared to a number of point-to-point DS-3s. > > > > > > TAANSTAFL. You keep forgetting that underneath ATM there are the > > > same SONET or clearline DS-3s/OC-3s etc. So, just by using IP > > > routers instead of ATM switches you get 30% more bandwidth for the > > > same price. ATM does not appear to make economical sense when > > > applied to both data and voice communications. So, from the point > > > of view of a user purchasing something carriers offer ATM may make > > > sense (if carrier does not offer native IP) -- but from the point > > > of view of a carrier ATM does not look that attractive. > > > > > > You still have to run IP over ATM (there's no such thing as native > > > ATM applications yet), and the extra level of encapsulation does > > > not bring anything worth 30% of bandwidth. > > > > > > In terms of real switching capacity (i.e. user data payload) the > > > new generation of IP routers is pretty much close to ATM > > > switches -- and quite cheaper. > > > > But, if you don't need the full 45 Mb/s, you can find a more > > cost-effective solution in the wide-area Fast-packet services. In > > the case of the MCI Hyperstream offerings, you don't have to pay for > > the full amount of a circuit from point A to point B -- you simply > > pay a monthly subscription fee and then a usage charge per Megabyte > > of data. > > > > So, you can build a multi-megabit/s backbone that is (say) 10 Mb/s > > and not end up having to purchase the entirety of the DS3 circuits > > needed to provision it. > > > > Indeed. > > Vadim works for a phone company, where long haul SONET links are > funny money. Not like the rest of us :-) > > --pushpendra > > Pushpendra Mohta [email protected] +1 619 455 3908 > Director of Engineering +1 800 876 2373 > CERFNet > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|