Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Nortel Networks (NT) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Phoenix who wrote (3813)	11/14/1999 3:30:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14638

Gary, thanks for those comments. I should add, however, that the level of confusion and uncertainty in this space is becoming exacerbated further, with the release of futures which may, or may not, actually be targeting packet level routing metrics. Hard to say at this point, and therefore the confusion that I just referenced. The Nexabit story by LU is a case in point, where it does seem, even if only remotely at this time, feasible to do packet manipulation and decision processes at OC-192 or 10 Gb/s. But they don't stop there. To do it at OC-768 running packet engines at 40 Gb/s in a not-too-distant release, too? It's far more likely that at this time they are actually referring to packet routing taking place at each of several different OC-12 or OC-48 port levels, and not at the concatenated higher levels cited (196 and 768), while, electively, other tributaries at OC-12 and OC-48 are handling still other protocols, such as ATM and the like. I'll keep my Missouri address for a while to receive mail on that one, much less believe that OC-3072 packet level routing is achievable just over the horizon. I'd like to be proved wrong on these matters, but I don't think that I will anytime soon. Comments welcome. Regards, Frank Coluccio