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 : LAST MILE TECHNOLOGIES - Let's Discuss Them Here -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DenverTechie who wrote (1750)	7/30/1998 9:22:00 PM
From: Dug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12823

Chat Denver, Just wanted to take a sec to thank everyone for all the input as I lurk here often. Re: WSTL being bought, not yet & you may have been thinking of AMTX. Dug

To: DenverTechie who wrote (1750)	7/31/1998 8:08:00 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12823

Denver, All, I'd like to both (1) comment on DSLAM classifications and DSL nomenclature in general, and (2) ask a general question of yourself and the board concerning this matter. Your depiction of the DSLAM falls into one of two general classifications, from a protocol perspective, according to some industry word smiths, trade journalists and practitioners. A while back, some of these players attempted to delineate between the DSL Access "Multiplexor" (DSLAM), and the DSL "concentrator." The variant that you described falls into the concentrator class, if we are to put any credence into this classification scheme, since it uses frames and routing in a contention scheme of the "best-effort" type on the back-end (toward the network's core, whatever that network happens to be), instead of a more "deterministic" form of scheme which uses ATM switching. In brief, they contended that a Multiplexor = Switching, and a Concentrator = Routing. Explanation and derivation: The classical DSLAM model, as it was defined by Bellcore and numerous other ITU participants including Alcatel, NT, LU (AT&T at the time), etc., prior to the time that Internet influences were even conceived, defined a backplane that collected and managed 53-byte cells at the convergence sublayers, not Ethernet frames, and handed these cells off to an ATM fabric in the network's edge, towards the core. With time, the influences of the Internet Protocol became felt, until the implications of IP were profound, and eventually manufacturers both saw the need for, and in some cases were pressured into, modifying their designs to incorporate through substitution, a contention based scheme using Layer 2 frames on the backplane, instead of deterministic ANSI-defined cells. And in turn, at the gateway they incorporated packet routing in place of cell switching. In the concentrator mode, these frames, in turn, were collected and distributed in a manner that you described in your post as follows: >>It [DSLAM] aggregates the Ethernet traffic from the modems and concentrates it into a single Ethernet backbone to go into a router, gateway or switch.<< The question that I'd like to ask is this: Has this distinction taken hold in the industry? Or are both forms (cell-switched- muxes and frame-contention- concentrators) considered to be DSLAMs at this point in time, without distinction? Regards, Frank C.

To: DenverTechie who wrote (1750)	7/31/1998 4:14:00 PM
From: MikeM54321	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12823

DenverTechie, Thanks for the info on DSLAM's. As I guessed, lack of interoperability makes it hard to decide on a specific company getting a lot of business. Hence, very hard to figure out a way to invest in it. Not unusual in this complicated sector. On another subject, care to speculate on what Ascend has up it's sleeve? Ascend simply got hammered when the news came out. I think it may be a good move, strategically. Financially, no one knows yet? So why it got hammered is puzzling? Ascend has had problems in the past integrating a company(Cascade) they purchased, but it turned out to be their savior. Maybe the market thinks Ascend is stumbling with this deal. Would appreciate anyone's learned opinion. Thanks, MikeM(From Florida) _________________________________ Stratus Computer, Inc. Stratus makes fault-tolerant servers and software for industries that can't afford any downtime. Its computers feature redundant hardware for reliable operation. Products include the Continuum family of fault-tolerant computers and the Intel-based RADIO Cluster computer for distributing software across networked computers. It also offers electronic commerce software as well as securities and brokerage applications. Stratus's customers include telecommunication companies (which account for more than 50% of sales), banks, brokerage firms, hotels, and airlines. _______________________________ NEW YORK, July 31 (Reuters) - Internet access equipment supplier Ascend Communications Inc. is in talks to buy Stratus Computer Inc.SRA , which makes computers used to run phone switching systems, sources familiar with the deal said. Terms of the deal, which could be finalized over the weekend and announced by Monday, were not available, but the San Jose Mercury reported earlier on Friday that deal would be worth around $800 million in Ascend stock. The deal would be a strategic coup for Ascend, accelerating its move to develop a new generation of integrated voice and data networks based on Internet standards, analysts said.