[5783] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Airplane crashing into Atlanta-NAP
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Darin Wayrynen)
Sat Oct 26 22:50:25 1996
To: freedman@netaxs.com (Avi Freedman)
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 19:42:22 -0700 (MST)
From: "Darin Wayrynen" <darin@good.net>
Cc: nathan@netrail.net, freedman@netaxs.com, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <199610262336.TAA08436@access.netaxs.com> from "Avi Freedman" at Oct 26, 96 07:36:44 pm
>
> Of course, I was half-joking, but why only one Gigaswitch? Why not two,
> for redundancy, as is implemented at Pennsauken?
>
> With a backup FDDI ring?
> And I assume, spare power supplies and processors?
>
> Avi
Which begs a question: why use a Giga-switch at all?
With the head of line blocking feature/problem and scalability only to
full duplex 100 mbps is a Gigaswitch something that should be used in
a next generation NAP?
I'm not suggesting it's intended to be the next generation NAP, but
you'd think that they would want to use the latest switches and
technology available, rather than continue down the FDDI road.
Darin
--
\////
( o o )
====================================oOO-(.)-OOo==========================
Darin Wayrynen, VP of Technology, (602) 303-9500 ext 3234, darin@good.net
