[1503] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: value of co-location
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dave Siegel)
Tue Jan 23 15:44:26 1996
From: Dave Siegel <dave@rtd.net>
To: curtis@ans.net
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 1996 13:29:30 -0700 (MST)
Cc: dennis@ipsilon.com, hwb@upeksa.sdsc.edu, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <199601231508.KAA24945@brookfield.ans.net> from "Curtis Villamizar" at Jan 23, 96 10:08:24 am
> If ATM is being used in VBR without the V mode, essentially providing
> point to point connections between routers at above DS3 rate, then
> there is no need for complex reassembly or any form of congestion
> control. That may turn out to be the way ATM is used by ISPs. The
> other way will be as a LAN technology where the SAR complexity and
> congestion issues will come into play.
If ATM is being used only as a way to get higher than DS3 rates of speed for
point to point circuits between routers, why have an ATM switch at all? I
can see why you might do that *now*, but I don't see this requirement being
a long term thing.
I *do* see a need to spend more cash on routers than ATM switches, like
several others. IP over SONET would be a useful thing to have.
Dave
--
Dave Siegel President, RTD Systems & Networking, Inc.
(520)623-9663 Network Engineer -- Regional/National NSPs (Cisco)
dsiegel@rtd.com User Tracking & Acctg -- "Written by an ISP,
http://www.rtd.com/~dsiegel/ for an ISP."
