North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
RE: Internet II is coming...
>From: Sean Doran[SMTP:firstname.lastname@example.org] >Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 1996 2:28 PM > >Finally, I assert that we are already at the point where anything >that can be deployed today that is based on ATM (which incidentally >typically rides over SONET/SDH) can be kludged up (or even done right) >with Cisco gear and SONET/SDH. ATM has a temporary edge in being >multivendor and making it easy to do TDM-style and point-to-multipoint >things, however the former is likely to be short-term and the latter >is something that can be done better for Internet traffic anyway, >with a bit of cleverness in the latest and in the next generation >of IP routers. "IP Unter Alles", in other words, right? Okay, I'll take the bait. This past weekend, we demonstrated (1) video-conferencing, (2) streaming video, (3) 155 Mbps to the desktop Internet connectivity, and (4) connectivity to the Public Switched Telephone Network, all over our ATM OC3c backbone, simultaneously and continuously. #1 & #2 can be either IP or native ATM, and in this case we ran it over IP. #3 requires ATM, although you can get close to it using other technologies. But what about #4? Connection to the PSTN? Please explain to me how to, in a non-kludgey manner, provide the PSTN connectivity using only Cisco routers. I certainly believe that most customers would consider speaking into a microphone attached to their PC and listening to the PCs speaker just a tad on the kludgey side. Not to mention that they would need an extra sound card to avoid having to say "over" every time they were through speaking. No, I think they want to use the nifty 900Mhz Sony cordless phone they just bought at Circuit City, and have a level of service (note I avoided the dreaded 'Q' word) similar to what they get from their POTS line. 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? >Since these routers will be needed with or without ATM, the time >to ponder whether ATM really has that much added value in the >long run is upon people already. As is the time to ponder how all the various technologies can work well together. What is long past is the time to flame a technology which has already become an integral part of the Internet infrastructure, and which will remain so for a long time to come. There are plusses and minuses to the widespread deployment of ATM, just as with *any* technology, however it does have some undeniable advantages, and one of them is its ability to carry voice traffic independent of IP traffic, and to connect in a reasonably straightforward manner to the PSTN. Would you prefer to have voice traffic clogging up the IP backbone?? -- Jim Browning "My views do in fact reflect the views of my sponsor, and I am now going to go look for that asbestos suit said sponsor provides to those of us who are inclined to support the merits of ATM on Nanog" - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -