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 : Silkroad -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MangoBoy who wrote (93)	11/18/1998 11:04:00 AM
From: ahhaha	Respond to of 626

Unknown, but most likely not. This isn't a standard VC start-up. More like HWP or AAPL when they were in the garage.

To: MangoBoy who wrote (93)	11/21/1998 2:36:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 626

Mark, re: Anschutz, you ask,"Is he involved here?" Not sure if that was rhetorical, or actual, in any event I don't know. It surely would be interesting if he was, tho. While we're on the subject of Juniper and Avici, are you aware of any progress being made in the way of betas or actual deployments? I can't help but get the feeling that these will go the way of Ipsilon, or be bought up and shelved to quiet them by one of the dominants. What's your take? Comments on this? Anyone? These products make use of WDM at the physical gateway level and they make claims of very large OC-x rates. For example, they will take in forty OC-48s [using up to forty discrete OC-48 optical ports on their frame] and state that their aggregate flows are on the order of an equivalent OC-1,920 or 100 Gb/s. But those rates are not concatonated (i.e., unified) flows, as in the way SR proposes. Rather, they are discrete, separate flows, each to its own lambda, which are joined at the terminus locations, supposedly. Or, the marketing literature behind these products would have the uninitiated believe, into one unified flow, as we have been discussing here. But, in actuality, they employ traditional means associated with DWDM. At least that is my take on the matter. But with regard to a unified flow, this is a good case in point, They have not actually even purported this to be the case, come to think of it. Instead, what they are talking about is taking in multiple OC-48s and delivering them end to end, and then breaking them out via classical (and some newer fast flow) routing techniques. I can hardly believe that I'm calling anything that has to do with DWDM as a "traditional means" at this early stage. Internet Time. Isn't it wonderful? And at the same time, *misterioso?*