SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : LAST MILE TECHNOLOGIES - Let's Discuss Them Here
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Robert Romero who wrote (239)9/27/1996 12:09:00 AM
From: Tom Eames   of 12823
 
IP packets can be carried by AAL5 over ATM according to well understood methods devised in the ATM Forum and endorsed by both the ITU and ANSI both Nationally and Internationally ( and endorsed by virtually every Carrier). The ATM AAL5 can use classical IP over ATM, LANE or MPOA depending on the circumstances. The ATM only wastes 10% of the bandwidth but allows compatibilty with the evolving backbones, CBR Voice services, CBR DS0 services like ISDN and Video Telephony and MPEG for video. The cost of the ATM silicon will disapear into the noise as we move down to .25u within the next year or two. Within a few years ( the same time it will take for these services to blossom) the cost of ATM silicon will be gone. If IP packets are used then the transport facility, it is service specific and will never be compatible with the evolving network and will never carry voice or video in a proper manner. ATM is only a multiplexing technique and nothing more which permits mixed services with mixed demands and controlled quality of services. It is just plain innapropriate to use a service specific multiplexing scheme like IP/DS0/1/3, VTs or MPEG at the physical transport level. This simple argument goes unnoticed by each of the factions only considering their own service and niche. I makes tremendous sense to backhaul services like TCP/IP Internet to a central router over an ATM network. As the service expands the Routers can be moved closer to the serving office as it becomes necessary for traffic reasons. Most of the discussions in this area ignore that the world needs one multiplexing standard and its going that way (like it or not) and building yet another island is not the right thing to do. The current network is a mess and if we keep going in all these service specific directions we will just make it worse. It will become unmanageable. In the fiber world they finaly ( with a lot of help from Bellcore) have aggreed on one scheme world wide called SONET/SDH and its the right thing to do. Now lets not mess up ADSL or VDSL as it is a wonderful mechanism for delivery a variety of services to the home over the existing infrastructure. I've never in 25 years seen so much support for one standard as ATM in the ATM Forum, DAVIC, Bellcore, ANSI, ETSI and the ITU, lets not fight it, lets all work together to refine it and make it work!
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News