[1104] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Links on the blink - reprise
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Ferguson)
Sun Nov 19 09:47:25 1995
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 1995 09:37:36 -0500
To: "Jeffrey P. Oliveto" <joliveto@cwi.net>
From: Paul Ferguson <pferguso@cisco.com>
Cc: "'smd@sprint.net'" <smd@sprint.net>,
"'cook@cookreport.com'" <cook@cookreport.com>,
"'nanog@merit.edu'" <nanog@merit.edu>
At 09:17 AM 11/19/95 -0500, Jeffrey P. Oliveto wrote:
>
>DS3/DS1 Backbone/Trunk capacity planning principles, whether across a Frame
>Relay Backbone or Cisco 7000 hdlc trunk network are still the same. It's
>just as easy to over configure DS3/DS1 Cisco HDLC trunks as Frame Relay
>trunks.
>
I would have a tendency to disagree with you here, but que sera, sera.
>Potentially at issue here is not Frame Relay networks as a transport but that
>a Cisco 7000 can not scale properly to support 120+ end-users. :-)
>
>Modern Frame Relay switches:
>
>1) have sub-msec latency
>2) can support multiple trunks at DS3+ (to include ATM)
>3) are not burdened with processing any of the IP layer 3 nor routing overhead
>4) because of 3 have a cost per port that is 300 to 400% less than a Cisco 7000
>5) can have it's backbone shared across multiple services thereby reducing
both
>capitalization and bandwidth expense
>6) allow ISP to pass the cost savings on to customers
>
>
I partially agree with your points above, but still maintain that it is much
easier to sloppily engineer a frame-relay network than one consisting of
point-to-point links.
My $.02.
- paul
