[9171] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Coincidence...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Vadim Antonov)
Wed May 7 17:10:56 1997
Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 13:51:10 -0700
From: Vadim Antonov <avg@pluris.com>
To: avg@pluris.com, bmanning@isi.edu
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Bill Manning <bmanning@ISI.EDU> wrote:
>Of course there are those that simply see the PSTN as just one more way to
>move IP packets about. Lets see; radio, wireless, sat-link, cable, lans,
>PSTN, avian-carrier, seismic-wave... lots of ways to move IP packets about.
Yep. So far the only realistic way to move massive amounts of
long-distance traffic is fiber.
>the PSTN is one, but not the only one. And its not clear there is enough
>capacity in the PSTN to carry all the bits about. Its not clear to me that
>ATM will continue to work at terabit rates..
It won't. So what. If you want to purchase a terabit router, write a
conditional purchase order -- you'll get it pretty soon. I'm serious.
>SAR may be a bit tough to do at OC768-ish rates.
"Doctor, it hurts when i do that." "Don't do it, then".
>And then there is all that PSTN infrastructure that will
>have to be replaced...
Yep. It's only money. They already have rights of way.
>push all that back on the rate payers? you bet.
There's a lot of money to be made off Internet (i do not mean browsers
and search engines). I'd rather think that capital is quite interested
in the opportunity.
--vadim
