North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Internet II is coming...
lets just say, 'it works' and leave it at that. Jeff Young [email protected] > Return-Path: [email protected] > Received: from merit.edu (merit.edu [35.1.1.42]) by postoffice.Reston.mci.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA20378; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 10:27:49 -0400 (EDT) > Received: from localhost ([email protected]) by merit.edu (8.7.6/merit-2.0) with SMTP id KAA17522; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 10:19:08 -0400 (EDT) > Received: by merit.edu (bulk_mailer v1.5); Thu, 10 Oct 1996 10:18:55 -0400 > Received: (from [email protected]) by merit.edu (8.7.6/merit-2.0) id KAA17495 for nanog-outgoing; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 10:18:55 -0400 (EDT) > Received: from bifrost.seastrom.com (bifrost.seastrom.com [192.148.252.10]) by merit.edu (8.7.6/merit-2.0) with ESMTP id KAA17485 for <[email protected]>; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 10:18:52 -0400 (EDT) > Received: (from [email protected]) by bifrost.seastrom.com (8.7.5/960809.RS) id KAA16418; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 10:18:30 -0400 (EDT) > Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 10:18:30 -0400 (EDT) > Message-Id: <[email protected]> > From: "Robert E. Seastrom" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > CC: [email protected] > In-reply-to: <[email protected]> (message from Jim Browning on > Wed, 9 Oct 1996 18:17:54 -0700) > Subject: Re: Internet II is coming... > Sender: [email protected] > Content-Type: text > Content-Length: 1334 > > > From: Jim Browning <[email protected]> > > >| Oh, and by the way, given that the local loop provider has OC-48 SONET > >| provisioned to this particular location, we could just as easily have > >| provisioned the connection to our backbone at OC12 as opposed to OC3. > Did > >| I miss the Cisco announcement of an OC12 IP-SONET card? > > > >You may wish to discuss an NDA presentation on the forthcoming > >generation of routers from each of Cisco, Juniper and Bay Networks. > > Again, my post was based upon your assertion that this could be done today. > I sincerely hope that a new generation of routers is forthcoming asap that > can match ATM speeds. > > So, Jim, since your metric is what can be done _today_, could you tell > us just exactly how many ATM switch vendors can offer me _working_ > (not beta) OC12 interface cards _today_? The only one that I can > think of off the top of my head that I'd be willing to risk my > credibility as an engineer with management by going with is Fore. Of > course, that assumes that I'd be willing to risk my credibility as an > engineer by spec'ing ATM in the first place, which is a shaky > proposition to say the least. > > To paraphrase the old adage, when all you have is an ATM switch, > everything looks like aggregatable bandwidth. > > ---Rob > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|