[3591] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ATM Wide-Area Networks (was: sell shell accounts?)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tim Salo)
Tue Jul 23 16:02:07 1996
From: salo@msc.edu (Tim Salo)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 1996 14:50:11 -0500 (CDT)
To: pferguson@cisco.com
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 1996 14:28:27 -0400
> From: Paul Ferguson <pferguso@cisco.com>
> Subject: Re: ATM Wide-Area Networks (was: sell shell accounts?)
> [...]
> It depends on what you mean when you say 'performance'. I think
> there is more and more interest being vested in ATM inefficiency,
> and alternate technologies to better efficiency in the long-haul.
>
> Recall Jerry Scharf's numbers; they're indicative of the issue.
> [...]
> HDLC framing bytes = 3080633605 HDLC efficiency = 97.72
> ATM framing bytes = 3644304857 ATM efficiency = 82.61
> ATM w/snap framing bytes = 3862101043 ATM w/snap efficiency = 77.95
At a certain point, some of these arguments about ATM efficiency sound a bit
like saying FDDI is terrible because 4B/5B encoding is only 80% efficient.
I think a more interesting measure of the value of ATM versus other
wide-area technologies is some sort of measure of throughput per dollar.
-tjs
