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 : Agilent Technologies (A) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Aaron M. Hightower who wrote (194)	3/22/2000 1:29:00 AM
From: Vijay Mehta	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 620

>> PACKET SWITCHING SUCKS! Aaron, No. I guess with packet switching, the purported benefit is that connections are "always on" and every "circuit" is active. This means that the capacity of the medium (actually the thinnest pipe) is sharable by multiple simultaneous sessions, without setting aside a pipe for each circuit. Of course, you don't have the same service level guarantees as in a circuit switched network, but with Frame Relay, ATM etc., there is a way to set to "Committed bit rate" which is honored. Any bandwidth above this rate will be marked "discard eligible" so, there are no guarantees on the excess traffic. Essentially, in a packet switched world, the pipes are shared for higher utilization. This actually works great for traffic that is not delay sensitive (i.e., data networks). With the explosion in data traffic (expected to be 97% of all traffic by 2007), it is better to build networks that work best for data, and lay voice over it (with special QOS options). I'm eager to hear your counter. Vijay