To: jghutchison who wrote (9225 ) 6/25/2000 12:01:00 AM From: Frank A. Coluccio Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 12623
jghutchinson, Great post.. provocative, even to me. With regards to the differences between: "... legacy SONET/SDH equipment, and disruptive state-of-the-art technology including long and short haul DWDM, optical switching, and optical routing," you go on to say:"The analogy is akin to comparing a Yugo and a Ferrari and calling them automobile transportation. One is a clunker, the other is sleek, elegant, and very fast." Very true, at the features and functionality levels. But one thing deserves mention here. And that is, I've yet to see one of these disruptive state-of-the-art technolog[ies] including long and short haul DWDM, optical switching, and optical routing network elements emerge without full dependency on SONET framing and network management constructs... ... with the possible exception of ESCON, Gb Ethernet and Fibre Channel, although each of these latter formats, too, has also been adapted to SONET port interfaces. As has the emerging 10 Gb Ethernet, which is slated for pre-standards releases within the next several months, and ratification as a full blown standard sometime in 2001. As such, the traffic flows of the new machines remain conducive to "copper cage" machines, which means that they can be switched and routed through digital cross connects and add-drop multiplexers, just like any other SONET flow. This is not meant to be argumentative, rather it is meant to be illuminative in the hope of neutralizing all of this marketecture talk about next gen whatevers outshining SONET. I would like to see an alternative to SONET, too, and we'll come to see this when the "real" next generation of optical network begins to emerge. There's a lot of copper and iron smelting that needs to take place before we reach that stage. We aren't quite there yet, IMO. FAC