North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Another UUNET Explanation
On the inverse, routers--if designed properly, can be 10 times better because of lower overhead, cost effectiveness, etc. I don't think this is going to be a debate that one will win in this forum. There are many router only based backbones, such as ours, Digex, etc. Then there are the many on the fr/router side.. just as "effective" one might say.. rob > > > > This is not exactly true. Frame Relay -- if designed properly, and with > good frame switches -- can be - IMHO - 10's of times better. > > Frame Relay allows yout he ability to psuedo-directly connection various > pop's together, and gives that clean appearance of a 'no-hop' back bone. > Why route when you can switch? > > > > On Tue, 1 Jul 1997, Robert Bowman wrote: > > > layer 2 vs. layer 3 > > > > tis like comparing a motorcyle to an automobile--both get you places > > but in fairly different ways > > > > rob > > > > > > I've noticed that several of the larger networks use frame-relay. > > > > > > Why? Our experience with frame-relay with the local telco has had > > > mixed results. > > > > > > What technical advantages does a frame-relay network have over an > > > IP routed network? > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > Joe > > > > > > > >
|