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 : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jach who wrote (18563)	10/29/1998 5:39:00 PM
From: The Phoenix	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77397

Jach, You're so clueless. You should first understand who you're talking to before taking shots. Perhaps you should read the PNNI spec...in fact, before you do go back and understand the job that PNNI is intended to do. OG

To: jach who wrote (18563)	10/30/1998 8:40:00 AM
From: aladin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77397

Jach, I guess I am not surprised that I haven't seen you at UNH or MCNC at any of the testing (PNNI Interoperability Tests). From the PNNI doc that you claim to have read: 'A protocol is defined for distributing topology information between switches and clusters of switches. This information is used to compute paths through the network. A hierarchy mechanism ensures that this protocol scales well for large world-wide ATM networks. A key feature of the PNNI hierarchy mechanism is its ability to automatically configure itself in networks in which the address structure reflects the topology. PNNI topology and routing is based on the well-known link-state routing technique.' ... My point, as an admitted routing bigot, is with ATM the layer 3 devices view the 'cloud' as a single hop. The reality is that the switch fabric is complicated and has all the same foibles as older leased line based layer3 networks. Assuming there is no latency or convergence in an atm cloud is absurd. That doesn't mean ATM isn't a great WAN architecture, I am simply making the point that some vendors and technicians oversell it. If I took a national network and used routers on the edges and used ATM switches at the core to cross connect everything I certainly lower the appearance of hops in the network. The same network using routers connected by SONET will show many more hops (since the internal switches are replaced by sonet routers). Both networks operate at OC-12, but the sonet based network will have significantly lower latency and increased throughput. Generally leased services from a carrier will be ATM or Frame, but lets not kid ourselves - they are easier to provision (for the carrier), they are not technically superior. John