North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Exchanges that matter...
> Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 14:56:00 -0800 > From: Vadim Antonov <email@example.com> > To: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com > Subject: Re: Exchanges that matter... > Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org [slashing and reordering your response slightly] > ATM as a LAN is probably ok, if it can compete with Gb Ethernet > price/performance-wise. Precisely my point, (which you managed to delete in your response). Price/performance seems like a pretty good analysis technique, at least for technologies that pass some basic hurdles, like "working." > FDDI is not a WAN technology. Losing 20% of bandwidth of a 10 ft > piece of fiber is one thing. Losing 20% of bandwidth of a > $3M/yr circuit is quite different. I don't understand. Are you trying to say that price/performance analysis is appropriate for LAN technologies, but not for WAN technologies? Now, I could understand if you said, "I analyzed ATM WAN services for one configuration once and concluded that other technologies provided better cost/performance in all possible configurations," or even "I don't think ATM products and standards are mature enough for my application." However, you seem to be saying that wide-area technologies should be assessed based on total cost and overhead, rather than on cost/performance... -tjs - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -