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 : TLAB info? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Carragher who wrote (4960)	1/29/1999 10:49:00 PM
From: Jerryco	Respond to of 7342

From the Yahoo thread: Finally, factual, technical conversations! by: MCF_LAF 5433 of 5445 I've been checking this board out for a month, waiting to see if more than two people actually knew what TLAB's products did. So, any thoughts on the threat ATM switches pose w/i the next 12mos? When can ATM sw's properly channel traffic and match the network mgmt control robustness of DCS's? Even if ATM does come up to speed, will DCS's port capacity continue to offer the scalability, and thus better price performance, than ATM. Finally, for a marginal price/performance gain, will the telco's change their operations procedures for provisioning high-speed circuits? Welcome any technical commentary. Interested investors, please read, learn, and ask questions.

To: John Carragher who wrote (4960)	1/29/1999 10:52:00 PM
From: Jerryco	Respond to of 7342

From the Yahoo thread: Hey MCF_LAF by: oldtelcoguy 5438 of 5445 I hope you don't mind if I take you down memory lane a bit but when the dominant interface to business sites was direct T1 from the central office, the older 1/0 crossconnects (those with 64K channelized internal rearrangement capability) were the first electronic system that interfaced with the customers traffic. Thes e systems would peel off the chanelized voice from the channelized data bundles and route accordingly. As fiber and optical rings started appearing in the network, the 5500 system started to become the dominant first interface to the customer. This was basically an economics issue. In my experience, systems like the Dacs IV (Lucent) or 5500 are about 25% the cost of 1/0 systems for the same number of interfaces. Also the business tarrifs for buying a full instead of a fractional T1 crosses over at about 6 64K circuits.Basically what I mean is that the cost models from both the telco and the customer drove the utilization of systems like 5500 as the primary interface to the customer. This is great from Tellabs perspective because any incoming signals, whether they be Frame Realy on a T1 or DS3 Video or ATM based CPE equiment drives the increase in the number of interfaces on their systems. So the increase in all of this traffic drives up the utilization of 5500. But, at some point, all ATM customers will tip the scales and the 5500 will no longer be the primary interface to the customer. Right now that is not the case, even if there is an ATM signal riding in an optical ring, it will hit the 5500 and be segregated off to an ATM switch in the office. So the point is ATM is good for TLAB, right now. In fact, anything on the network drives up the size of the deployed 5500 systems.However, at some point ATM will be the dominant poayload and it will make sense to hit a system that deals with bigger payloads and ATM granularities (aka the new BTM product TLABS is building). When the economic model tips, they will be ready.Now with the AN2100 they also have a CPE piece to fit in to the network. They have got this thing all figured out and should be in good shape unless the Cisco's of the world get their way and the ugly IP technology creaps in to the backbone of the networkOTG PS - Sorry for my long message

To: John Carragher who wrote (4960)	1/29/1999 10:55:00 PM
From: Jerryco	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 7342

From the Yahoo thread: More questions, OTG by: MCF_LAF 5442 of 5445 Long answers are great, if you don't mind lots of Q's. We come seeking knowledge. So if I understand correctly, the 5500 not only switches DS0 traffic between ports (sending calls to the appropriate C5 switch, be it the LEC's, an IXC or CLEC), but it also aggregates and routes the FR/IP/ATM traffic coming in on the DS3/DS1 ports to dedicated FR/IP/ATM ports for transport/switching on the respective packet NW? Do the DS1/DS3 inputs now carry mixed traffic? Can 5500 ports be provisioned to accept a mix of DS3 and DS1 ports within a frame, and then the sw fabric handles the switching at the DS0 level regardless? Is CLEC/IXC interconnection w/ the LEC's a significant portion of the DCS port demand as traffic between carriers grows w/ customer fragmentation (a port acts as a dedicated line between the LEC/IXC/CLEC)? AN2100: as I understand it, it will sit on top of the C5 sw on the edge of the backbone and act as an TDM/ATM gateway, yet you describe it as CPE, implying it combines IP/ATM/FR traffic w/ PBX outputs in the enterprise. Clarification? Also, will ATM sw's evolve to the pt where a small/med size business can plug all of their wires into an ATM CPE sw which connects to a core ATM sw? How soon? Finally (for this mssg), it seems to me that once ATM sw's can perform DCS functions (and the traffic volumes are sufficient) that they would still be relegated to service fewer, yet higher capacity feeds, because of the lower port density/footprint. Tx.

To: John Carragher who wrote (4960)	1/29/1999 10:59:00 PM
From: Jerryco	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7342

From the Yahoo thread: (this post should have proceeded my last three-sorry about that). Rafa_do by: oldtelcoguy 5430 of 5445 A couple weeks ago Mike Birck made a comment at an analysts conference about AN2100. He said that this thing could eliminate the need for Class 4 voice Switches in the network. In other words, actual phone customers are connected to Class 5 switches and Class 4 switches are used to interconnect the class 5 switches. A class 4 switch is the data equivalent of a router. Since this AN2100 converts everything to ATM, his point was that the Class 4 voice switch could be replaced by the cheaper smaller ATM router. This would be a huge windfall for network operators and would mean a significant advantage for the AN2100. The only down-side was that Jackmann (sp?) said that Sprint did some development on their side to make this thing work and that Tellabs would need to do development work to sell this to any other customers. I would think that 2000 will be the very big year for this thing.