North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI)
In message <[email protected]>, Paul Ferguson writes: > At 12:36 AM 3/29/96 -0500, Shikhar Bajaj wrote: > > > > >Several of our clients seriously consider > >ATM/SONET the best way to go because they feel that a switched > >technology like ATM is the best single technology (currently) > >to offer them high speed and support for multiple applications (like > >video and voice, as well as data). They are not just sending around > >200-byte IP packets. Furthermore, the ability to get > >quality of service support and guarantees is important them. They don't > >think that RSVP, when it comes, will be enough. Finally, > >to them, the economics makes sense. They understand the limitations > >(i.e. overheads) and believe that they are acceptable. > > > > What you fail to mention, however, is that in an effort to achieve > these noble goals across the Internet, you are relegated to using IP > over ATM. This is the fatal flaw. > > Sorry. I remain unconvinced. > > Unless you begin building massive [native] long-haul ATM networks, this > is not an acceptable transport for the reasons I mentioned earlier. > > - paul > Paul, Shikkar, Can we move this discussion to alt.religion.atm? Curtis
|