Hagar,
4 - Ascend's Dial in access seems focused, ATM and Frame Relay switching is
well established but Ascend's IP story is murky at best. In an area that is possibly
the forefront of the new networks, this confuses me. I see the Westford group
focusing on "IP Switching" ala MPLS and the Minn. group doing Routing. Why isn't
one platform doing both? Is one platform for the edge only and the other for the
core only?
Switching and routing are different technologies for different markets. Switches are faster and more scalable, and more suited for use by carriers, while routers are more flexible and mostly used by enterprises.
Cisco is king of IP routing, including in carrier networks. The problem is, IP routing has scalability limits, and most carriers are looking to switched technologies (ATM, MPLS). This is where Ascend is the strongest, and Cisco is playing catch-up.
Who cares about the GRF? That market belongs to Cisco, and Ascend has very little hope of gaining ground there. Regardless, growth in IP routing will likely slow in the coming years.
As I see it, Ascend has the right focus and they are better positioned looking forward than anyone else, including Cisco. Not only are they doing the right thing in multiservice core switching, but they are also leveraging their presence in the RAC market into DSL. At least one of the network/telecom providers I am working with is using Ascend DSL. And they are a major player (312 CO's in the next year to be outfitted with Ascend DSLAMs). Anyone care to guess how much that is worth?
bucky89 |
