Juniper Networks - JNPR Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Juniper Networks - JNPR

JNPR 39.95

0.0%

Jul 2 5:00 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Wizard who wrote (316)	7/16/1999 6:40:00 PM
From: The Phoenix	Read Replies (3) of 3350

My last comment on this subject: There is no doubt that ASND got badly hurt by CIsco. Two years ago they announced losses! Losses due to a dramatic loss in RAS market share... CSCC ramped about a quarter after that...approximately 18 months after CSCO bought STRM and stuffed it under their shirt. The goal was to delay ATM and CSCO did a great job of doing just that. Nor would Cisco have lasted this long if it weren't for their acquisitions. Let's be clear... Cisco would not be CISCO were it not for their acquisitions. So, we are in total agreement there...;) The problem is that packet processing just isn't fast enough to do voice. It doesn't work and current routing is fast becoming the real bottleneck. Packet processing isn't fast enough to do voice? Wow.. you've been away a while. Voice packets use cut-through (Netflow) style techniques. Packet processing is not the issue. QOS is the issue. ATM (basically fixed length 53-byte packets) does voice just fine..thank you very much. ATM can guarantee delivery through the use of discrete service mechanisms. IP has traditionally used best effort..which of course doesn't work for voice. BUt with new QoS developments in IP these problems are VERY quickly becoming a thing of the past. Check into RSVP, RTP, IP Precedence, DifSev. etc... you'll be amazed. Have you taken a look at QWST, UUNET, PSINet or other providers delivering voice on IP??? Don't confuse the problems with delays on the internet/world wide wait with routing. TOo many people make that mistake. Packet networks serve up voice just fine... heck for that matter todays telephony networks use packets. 64byte packets..they just use old outdated, ineffecient, costly circuit switches. Question...why should the CO reserve 64K a bandwidth for you and a port if you're not using the phone????? Anyway, I'm not sure this is a discussion you want to have with me.... I'm pretty opinionated in this area. :0 Sorry... OG

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next