[9197] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Coincidence...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael Dillon)
Wed May 7 20:46:47 1997
Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 14:48:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Michael Dillon <michael@memra.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <199705072033.AA22413@zed.isi.edu>
On Wed, 7 May 1997 bmanning@ISI.EDU wrote:
> Its not clear to me that
> ATM will continue to work at terabit rates.. SAR may be a bit tough to do
> at OC768-ish rates. And then there is all that PSTN infrastructure that will
> have to be replaced... push all that back on the rate payers? you bet.
I though that ATM cell sizes were so small in order to better support
real-time voice and video. We are already getting to the point where
1500 byte IP packets can be transmitted end to end in the same or less
amount of time as the original ATM networks were planned to be. When data
rates get this high, is there any good reason to shred packets, other than
maintaining compatibility with obsolete ATM gear?
Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting
http://www.memra.com - E-mail: michael@memra.com
The bottom line is track record. Not track tearing. Not track derailing.
But pounding the damn dirt around the track with the rest of us worms.
-- Randy Bush
