Frank,
I'm not sure why so many folks on SI feel compelled to steer discussions into an argumentative tone. It may be that I'm not clear about my position but I find explaining everything with paragraphs of detail quite boring. Your original response to my post was metered and made good points. Let's try to keep this above board.
optical
systems are poised to replace backbone routers and switches, never mind SONET,
equipment rooms, air conditioning systems, and untold other levels of legacy
complexity, and all you have to tell me is to refocus my views, and return my
thinking to routers.
Frank, I'm a big believer in optical systems, however it's my understanding that these are transport achitectures. I don't believe that..at least currently...they are well suited to network edges.
"Today there is no standard method to do this and so you can either use
rudimentary means or go with a single vendor and get a competitively superior
solution.
I can hardly believe that you said that. It sounds very much like something I have on
a 1977 audio tape somewhere when I believed in another kind of protectionism,
like you appear to be doing, today.
Frank,..please read all the words. "TODAY" is what I said. Today vendor interoperability doesn't exist....does it??? Surely we will converge on a single implementation for multiservice deliever on IP...or ATM.. or SONET, etc.. Until we do vendors that want to deploy new IP based services will do a better job using a single vendor implementation. TODAY vendors are implementing differing methods for QoS, packet discard and recovery, service deployement/provisiniong, security, and a host of other things. Is this clearer?
OG |
