[1112] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Links on the blink - what will/should mci & sprint do?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Curtis Villamizar)
Mon Nov 20 14:47:55 1995
To: cook@cookreport.com
cc: Sean Doran <smd@icp.net>, freedman@netaxs.com, jon@branch.com, alan@gi.net,
michael@memra.com, nanog@merit.edu
Reply-To: curtis@ans.net
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 18 Nov 1995 23:59:50 EST."
<Pine.SUN.3.91.951118235535.11322D-100000@tigger.jvnc.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 14:33:26 -0500
From: Curtis Villamizar <curtis@ans.net>
In message <Pine.SUN.3.91.951118235535.11322D-100000@tigger.jvnc.net>, Gordon C
ook writes:
> Sean writes:
>
> Thirdly, there are some very cunning
> ideas being proposed by various hardware people for making
> the 7500 do interesting things on the switching front that
> very probably will get the router to deal with the kinds of
> loads you're asking about.
>
> COOK: does this mean that there is some way to get the cisco to behave
> like the cascade switch I asked about?? If not what in general does it mean?
>
> Finally you said if the 7500 doesn't perform well then you might have to
> do the redesign I asked about.... meaning going to an atm switched
> backbone with routers at the periphery of the backbone??
>
> ********************************************************************
> Gordon Cook, Editor & Publisher Subscript.: Individ-ascii $85
> The COOK Report on Internet Non Profit. $150
> 431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 Small Corp & Gov't $200
> (609) 882-2572 Corporate $350
> Internet: cook@cookreport.com Corporate. Site Lic $650
Newly expanded COOK Report Web Pages http://pobox.com/cook/
> ********************************************************************
We are bound by non-disclosure to limit what we say about future
products of the vendors we have chosen for final evaluation. I don't
think it is any big secret that vendors do have new products in the
works. IMO- the so called "wall" is not a problem but you need some
heftier routers than what is commonly used today.
I don't like the idea of going into a layer 2 and letting layer 2 deal
with it. You can probably build a working network either way.
Equipment cost per port is not our highest priority, it is secondary.
Stability and low loss in our backbone is a very high priority. That
says a lot about why the technology we ar looking at is different than
PSI, Alternet, and Netcom (and maybe a bit different than Sprint too).
ANS charges more for a reason.
Curtis
