|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2009 23:09:40 +0200 (CEST) From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> To: nanog@nanog.org In-Reply-To: <4fff97de0907091333h6cb58f5drada2a0265f51e9b6@mail.gmail.com> Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org On Fri, 10 Jul 2009, Zartash Uzmi wrote: > Can you say why precisely the cost of Ethernet is low compared to other > viable alternatives? The components going into ethernet devices are cheaper because of high volume, but it's also that the SONET/SDH stuff is grossly overpriced "because we can" by short sighted vendors. There are cheap ethernet ports for cheap platforms, there are basically no cheap SONET/SDH ports anywhere. POS is technically better compared to Ethernet for carrier links imho, but for instance Cisco price their SPA-TENGE-XFP at 1/6 the cost of SPA-OC192-XFP. I know quite a lot of people who would gladly pay more for POS, but not that much more. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |