|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
In-Reply-To: <4BACD644.5040803@bogus.com> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 01:47:43 -0500 From: Stefan <netfortius@gmail.com> To: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> Cc: nanog@nanog.org Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 10:44 AM, joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> wrote: > On 3/26/2010 8:15 AM, Rick Ernst wrote: >> >> I've noticed over the last 3 years or so that TDM, specifically T-1, >> access >> and transport has been in a steady decline. =A0Customers are moving to F= TTH >> and cable, or going WiMAX and Metro-Ethernet. =A0Ethernet seems to have >> taken >> an even bigger bite out of DS-3. =A0The bigger pipes seem to favor ether= net. >> A >> recent upgrade from OC-3 to GigE transport actually saved us a large chu= nk >> of money. >> >> I'm wondering if others are seeing the same behavior, if it's >> market-dependant, or if I'm just imagining things. =A0I'm working on >> building >> new infrastructure and my current thoughts are to minimize my TDM >> footprint. =A0It would be useful to get a better feel if this is an over= all >> trend or something local. >> > > Why I think it comes down to is do you want to use frame-relay, atm, sdh = and > ethernet when you can just use ethernet? > > lan-phy ethernet has economies of scale that result in lower cost along > virtually every dimension relative to the alternatives. > >> Thoughts? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Diversity, in case of locations meant to be used as each other's backup/fai= lover ***Stefan Mititelu http://twitter.com/netfortius http://www.linkedin.com/in/netfortius
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |