North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

RE: Airplane crashing into Atlanta-NAP

  • From: Owen DeLong
  • Date: Sun Oct 27 14:13:31 1996

> On Sun, 27 Oct 1996, Chris A. Icide wrote:
> 
> > Now that I've thrown in my share of late night sarcasm,  It would interest
> > me greatly to understand exactly why you came to the following
> > conclusions:
> > 
> > 1.	The "operation" in Atlanta is Mickey Mouse
> 
> Both the Internet and the POTS system are telecommunications networks that
> are vital to the modern economy. POTS moreso than the Internet right now
> but the Internet is certainly heading in that direction. POTS exchanges
> are always in ground floor concrete buildings with no windows or
> underground. But in Atlanta they stick it up on the 5th floor of some
> office building?!?!?!?
> 
I do not know where you get your data, but you are wrong.  Many POTS exchanges
in California, and many other parts of the country are not on the ground floor,
or in basements.  In fact, several of the POTS exchanges in San Francisco are
on multiple floors of the same building.

> > 2.	The floor # of a bulding affects the quality of the Exchange Point
> > 3.	The type of building affect the quality of the Exchange Point
> 
> I cannot explain these ones but have reached this conclusion from
> observing how the phone company builds and locates its exchanges. 
> 
Must be specific to your phone company or an incomplete perspective
of phone company methods.

The primary reason for telephone exchanges of the past being built on
ground floors and basements was the weight of the equipment and the
difficulty of moving it.  In modern times, the weight of the batteries
still plays a role, but exchanges are being remoted away from the batteries
with increasing regularity.

> > 4.	A city the size of Atlanta needs more than 1 Exchange Point
> 
> It has a lot more than one POTS exchange. Thus it will need more than 
> 1 Internet exchange. Why should the packets from every video-call in the
> city all travel downtown when frequently the two parties live in the same
> neighborhood?
> 
An interesting theory, but the Internet does not route information the same
way the telephone system does.  For one thing, you are comparing a connection
oriented network to a connectionless network.  There are subustantial differences.


> > Truly I would be very interested in your thoughts on these items, as
> > well may a few other folks on this list.
> 
> I'm taking a long term view in which ISP's are just another form of
> telephone company. Many ISP's are now getting to the size where they can
> consider aquiring strategically located properties, building concrete
> block exchange/colo buildings, wiring up entire office towers with 
> IP fiber and even running their own fibre in some case, especially in new
> subdivisions. 
> 
ISP's will never be another form of telephone company.  ISP's who are viewing
their role that way will not last long in the future.  Even telephone companies
will not maintain that role for very many years to come.  You are trying to
take a technology of the future and apply it to an obsolete model.

> By today's standards Atlanta-NAP may be a really great thing, but too soon
> we will discover that we aren't living in "today" any more and the
> standards will be different.
> 
Yes, they will, but I don't think they will go back to the Telco of the
'50's.

> Michael Dillon                   -               ISP & Internet Consulting
> Memra Software Inc.              -                  Fax: +1-604-546-3049
> http://www.memra.com             -               E-mail: [email protected]
> 
> 
Owen
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -