[39128] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Cable Modem [really good network design]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Wojtek Zlobicki)
Tue Jun 26 18:27:59 2001
Message-ID: <006401c0fe8f$320dd680$020a0a0a@wojtek>
From: "Wojtek Zlobicki" <wojtekz@idirect.com>
To: <nanog@merit.edu>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 18:27:33 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christian Kuhtz" <ck@arch.bellsouth.net>
To: "Wojtek Zlobicki" <wojtekz@idirect.com>
Cc: <nanog@merit.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 3:24 PM
Subject: Re: Cable Modem [really good network design]
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 03:01:41PM -0400, Wojtek Zlobicki wrote:
> > ATM to the desktop never took off, whats wrong with Ethernet over ATM ?
> > With devices such as
> > IADS, it allows for easy differentiation of traffic. Now you can cary
voice
> > and data over the same
> > physical link without worry.
> [..]
>
> Ever tried it without that? I have done quite a bit of less than
scientific
> testing of VoIP over a QoS-less infrastructures. Small VoIP packets seem
to
> have little trouble squeezing thru and it works actually pretty well.
That's
> without ATM QoS crap on a broadband connection.
I have to concede here. We were able to run the VOIP traffic using UBR, out
network
not being saturated, this may have helped, on a busy network, a lot of
problems could have
arrisen. What is nice, is that QOS is easy to enable in ATM. There are
many reasons that
ATM has not taken off, from a CLEC perspective, I believe it to be the
superior technology.
I would much rather have a 10 Mbps Ethernet feed from a company like Cogent
but those
links do not compare in pricing with DSL.
>
> --
> Christian Kuhtz <ck@arch.bellsouth.net> -wk, <ck@gnu.org> -hm
> Sr. Architect, Engineering & Architecture, BellSouth.net, Atlanta, GA,
U.S.
> "I speak for myself only.""
