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: Doughboy who wrote (2141)	10/14/1998 4:23:00 PM
From: Kenneth E. Phillipps	Respond to of 12823

From Network World By Nancy Weil IDG News Service, 10/13/98 Orlando, Fla. - The rise and fall of businesses increasingly will depend on the strength of their networks, making it critical for companies' application development teams and network administrators to work closely together, a panel of top telecommunications executives said here yesterday. Applications absolutely must work on corporate networks, something that requires cooperation among IS departments and network units, the four speakers said during the keynote panel discussion at Gartner Group's ITxpo98. Topics being discussed at the event include year 2000 compliance and network convergence of voice and data. The speakers -- CEOs Michael Armstrong of AT&T, Richard Notebaert from Ameritech, Charles Lee of GTE and James Crowe of Level 3 -- agreed that bandwidth demands remain the top concern for users, an issue forcing their companies to work on advanced technologies and cope with a lack of standardization. Crowe predicted that Moore's Law is quickly coming to the networking world. The law, which governs microprocessor development, holds that the number of transistors on a chip doubles every 18 months and that chip performance doubles yearly. Applied to networks, that will mean that advanced technologies such as asymmetric digital subscriber line and devices such as cable modems boost bandwidth capabilities to business and home users much more quickly than has occurred thus far. But the executives confessed they aren't wedded to any particular high-speed technology -- at least not where their companies are concerned -- because user demand drives that aspect of the market. Technological capabilities remain the stumbling block. "The backbone is going like hell," Armstrong said, noting that infrastructure is in place and being rapidly built out, "but the problem is the last mile" and deployment of technologies. The speakers did occasionally disagree on issues during questioning by Gartner analysts, who attempted to put the executives on the spot. For example, the executives disagreed about the roles deregulation and the U.S. Telecommunications Act of 1996 are having on their companies and the industry. Gartner Group analyst Ken McGee read a quote attributed to Armstrong when Ameritech and SBC Communications announced plans to merge. In the quote, Armstrong decried ongoing monopolies in telecommunications. Ameritech's Notebaert was sitting on Armstrong's right, close enough for the AT&T leader to touch. When asked to elaborate on the quote, Armstrong squirmed a bit amid laughter from hundreds of attendees packed into the large hall, but clarified his remark by saying that he wasn't specifically bashing the two companies involved because "sometimes bigger is a better critical mass and can serve customers better." He then went on to question the telecommunications act, which leaves thousands of users in some U.S. states unable to know precisely who is providing their local telephone service. Although the executives head companies that have, to varying degrees, been involved in scooping up smaller companies, merging and acquiring on a seemingly weekly basis, there were confessions that competition actually is a good thing in telecommunications because it keeps them all on their toes. "I for one like having competition," Notebaert said, adding that his company was losing wireless business in the Chicago market until competitors came along and began advertising those services there, creating a surge in customer demand. The only problem that remains for growth and opportunity are the "artificial regulatory barriers" that should be removed. On that score, Notebaert raised a different opinion from Lee, who called the telecommunications law "a great act" and said, "The only barrier left is that local companies can't get into long distance." Whatever their differing opinions, the executives all said their companies have been working diligently to ensure that the network backbones they provide will not collapse under the pressure of potential year 2000 problems. Most older software was written with a two-digit date field that is likely to read the "00" in 2000 as "1900" and therefore fail to make correct calculations. Corporations and government agencies have been scrambling to either rewrite software code or replace computer systems before the millennium arrives. The executives encouraged the audience to test repeatedly for year 2000 compliance. Multinational companies in particular should be working closely with partners and suppliers in developing nations and with third-tier suppliers who might not be as far along in dealing with the problem. Because European firms also are dealing with conversion to the single Euro currency, Notebaert said his advice is to "focus in a lot more on Europe, and I would do a lot of testing there." Crowe had more dire advice: "Stay out of elevators and airplanes and tall buildings at midnight" when the millennium arrives.

To: Doughboy who wrote (2141)	10/15/1998 12:16:00 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12823

Doughboy, The terms "level" and "layer" are sometimes used interchangeably in communications circles, but when discussing the protocol stack defined by the International Organization for Standardization's (ISO's) Open Systems Interconnection (OSI) Reference Model (RM), the most commonly used (hence the proper) term is "layer." Put them all together, and these three letter acronyms are known collectively as the ISO/OSI-RM or simply the OSI-RM. Be patient, I'll get to your question... L3 or Level 3 (LVLT) took some license in selecting their name, IMO, and their name refers to the Layer 3 of the OSI RM which is that suite of protocols that has to do with the Internet Protocol, or IP, which is LVLT's stated claim for being. TCP/IP is actually a combination of the OSI Layers 3 and 4 functionality, as shown in the chart below. There are other companies such as Layer 0 and Level 1 (or is it Layer 1?) whose purposes surround the particular attributes of the protocols in those layers, as also illustrated in my makeshift chart below. The OSI-RM actually consists of 7 Layers, usually read from the bottom up (where the physical layer feeds upwards until eventually you get to the actual application layer): Layer 7...........Application Layer 6...........Presentation Layer 5...........Session Layer 4...........Transport (TCP/UDP) Layer 3...........Network (IP) Layer 2...........Data Link (Frame Relay/ATM/Ethernet/Token Ring/FDDI...) Layer 1...........Physical Medium (Copper/Fiber/free space) See the slide at ieee-occs.org for a better graphic representation of this. In fact, if you have some time, the entire presentation at this site would be worth anyone's while if they are interested in TCP/IP standards development processes. ieee-occs.org The name of the presentation is: TCP/IP A Tutorial On A Family of Protocols and Some Other Interesting Things: A Presentation for the IEEE OC Chapter Communications Society Joint Meeting with OC Chapter Computer Society January 27, 1997 ========= The other part of your question dealt with the edge. The edge of any network is that portion where the subscriber base interfaces to the internal backbone, or core network components. In the public network, it could be considered the interface or "layer" (there we go again with layers) between the intercity transmission elements and the subscriber loops that feed residence or business. The latter would be considered the distribution network in many circles. To rough it out then, if we followed a call from my home in Brooklyn to my brother John's home in CA,, it would take the following path Franks' phone to 1st C.O. (distribution) 1st CO to tandem and Interexchange switches (edge] NY Interexchange office to LA Interexchange office (core) LA Interexchange to tandem switch to John's CO (edge) John's CO to his home (distribution) There is actually another couple of layers here, like the home distribution network or the personal service area PSA and the like, and the Full Service Area Network FSAN (a part of the future all optical distribution network) which is outside the realm of this discussion. So, when 3Com says that they are catering mostly to the edge, they mean that they are serving that part of the network that has to do with dial up (and other means of direct and indirect access) connections to ISPs and other service providers. More specifically, they are provisioning ISP POPS with dial access arrangements (dialup muxes, DSLAMS, concentrators, etc.) that are attached with T-1s to end office switches and other similar configurations, all of which takes place in what is said to be the network edge. The core exists on the other side of the ISP POP, upwards towards the NAPs, or national access points. The NAPs are the main peering locations on the Internet. Collectively, the NAPs matrix of high capacity connections [T3, OC-12, OC-48, etc. whether ATM or IP )can be referred to as the Internet's core, so to speak, and this is where 3Com would most likely defer to CSCO and BAY, and a growing number of startups, soon, very soon. HTH, Frank Coluccio