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 : Frank Coluccio Technology Forum - ASAP -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ftth who wrote (890)	1/8/2000 1:27:00 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1782

Dave, GbE, or more likely 10GbE is needed for its rudimentary transport attributes only, such as framing, timing, etc. It could also be a scaled down, skinny form of SONET where Packet of Sonet (POS) is used. Note: the article I'm citing here from Arnaud is a year old to the day. Therefore it is not surprising that he didn't use the 10GbE model in his work at the time of the writing, as I have in our fictitious network. Speaking of which, we may as well give our network a name. Any suggestions? How's SIFNet sound? For SI Fictitious Network? On top of 10GbE the rest of the networking challenge would be handled at the IP layer and above, for the most part. I just did a scan of the CANet article you provided, and it overflows of GbE, both implicitly and explicitly. Do a search on "Ethernet" in the body of the paper. Here are a couple of examples, below. "The GITH network would connect directly into the high speed Ethernet port of the computer or similar device which would then route the traffic within the house. There would be no need for telephone interface devices or expensive digital set top boxes to segregate and deliver multiple services." "4. The use of a simple low cost framing protocol such as Gigabit Ethernet to transport the data;" "A 64 channel metro DWDM fiber ring can provide up to 150 pair wise connections depending on how many wavelengths can be re-used. Each one of these channels can support a dedicated Gigabit Ethernet or an OC-48 connection." ====== I know where your biggest areas of concern would be. What may seem like a real problem here is NOT the implementation of 10GbE, per se, rather, how to invoke the broad range of administrative and service feature capabilities which are now supported by head ends and voice telephony exchanges. In the IP space these solutions exist in their own individual spaces. The need here is to have some body orchestrate how they are to take place over a single network. Okay, I've gotten us this far by bringing packet-over-10GbE-over-DWDM to the fore. The rest of the network is up to you. Or, those poor souls over in the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). -g- Regards, Frank Coluccio

To: ftth who wrote (890)	1/8/2000 1:28:00 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1782

re: Thread Housekeeping Note - KISS Thread, if I seem to be overly simplistic in some of my phrasing in the prior couple of posts, or even condescending lately, by spelling everything out to the 't', it's not because I think that the person to whom I'm writing at the time needs to be spoon fed. Although that might be the case, and that's alright, too. Rather, it's because I've received some very politely written requests, both here in PM and via email, asking me to be clearer in what I cover, and how I make use of certain technical terms. This is all very understandable and I'ill attempt (as I hope others will, as well) to accommodate those requests and where possible to keep it simple, stupid. If I or anyone else starts to backslide in this respect, then simply speak up and we'll make the adjustment or answer the specific question. Regards, Frank Coluccio