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 : The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: axial who wrote (856)	9/19/2000 10:19:28 AM
From: aladin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 46821

Guys, ATM as a desktop technology is dead. period. ATM as a core technology has no merit at speeds above OC3. The cell tax easily exceeds 15%. There is a reason that Cisco and Juniper rule the core of ISP's - they do packet over sonet. The competition only did packet over atm and missed the boat. Where does it fit - service provider carrier networks providing low speed (DS0 to DS1) connectivity to large enterprises with branch operations. As the underlying technology for DSL access and in similar environments. As to the vaunted QOS properties of ATM - most commercial services do not provide them. You are lucky to get congestion notification on many provider networks. In the lab and on paper ATM shines. In the real world its relegated to a niche. Yes this niche is growing, but don't read too much into it. John

To: axial who wrote (856)	9/19/2000 10:27:19 AM
From: justone	Respond to of 46821

Jim: I salute your courage for jumping into the religious war on IP vs. ATM. It is actually worth thinking about from an investment standpoint. I think you are right: the debate is over who manages networks, and right now operations people love ATM, which is why it sells. My own observation is that IP is beginning to absorb ATM protocols in response to the market's choice. Well, the word absorb is not quite correct; I've described the addition of MPLS as 'duct taping' the ATM protocol UNDER IP to make it work, but never mind. There is also some chance that ATM management layers will be taped onto/into IP. We should have a new name for this protocol, sort of IP over ATM. How about IPOATM, the "epitome" of data protocols? It seems we will have a network that is really IP/ATM, but may be called IP. VPNs in particular will want this. And we will have pure IP networks in the LAN, and pure ATM in the core. So the choice of the future may be do you want a varying length packet IPOATM or a fixed length cell IPOATM. And you should invest in companies that do both, IP and ATM to prepare for the future, I guess. justone opinion.