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: George T. Santamaria who wrote (337)	3/22/1999 7:33:00 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 626

Agreed, concerning the partnering aspect. Homegrown is not the way to go here for SR, unless they have a means of introducing their technology in such a way as to displace traditional flow management. I don't believe that this is achievable for them alone, within a startup's time-to-proof horizon, where common carrier technologies are at issue. At least not in common carrier circles. The carrier world is already densely populated with ubiquitously unfriendly alternatives to SR flows. For this reason I believe that their mark, if they should ever make one, would be in newer, uncharted markets, and those established markets that center in the "network core," which are relatively free of lower-order PSTN interconnection requisites. At the end points, they can also make a presence, but this is one of those uncharted markets I've referred to, since they (or someone else partnering with them) will need to introduce new hooks in order to implement user flows onto a medium that no one else can. And handing off to traditional carrier (SONET-intensive) transport networks and (switched/routed) edge devices will need to be someone else's purview in the short term, as well. Their cleanest opportunities lie in very dense core routes at this time, those which directly shunt the larger edge devices on the circumference of a spatially diminishing core. ---- Concerning the intermediate staging of data via QAM, I do see a reason why multiple data streams cannot be presented in some form of simplistic on-off optical code representation. But probably not for the same reasons that you do, unless I'm mistaken. I see the use of QAM or some other form of differential phase-amplitude coding as a means of partitioning individual feeds on different strata, since to do otherwise would be to introduce conflicting baseband signals all occupying the same time-amplitude space. There needs to be a means of differentiating them, and it appears to me that this may be done in the frequency domain. Once again, we resort to FDM to transport multiple inputs via QAMs, DPSKs, etc. While FDM in this case is not the end game, per se, it's required in order to elevate baseband to some differentiating point where it could be QAMed.

To: George T. Santamaria who wrote (337)	3/22/1999 7:58:00 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 626

I just came across a clip on the Ciena thread that contains some pretty bold claims. Note the traffic levels which are cited (in bold). Bold, indeed. -------- "Lightera's products provide dynamic bandwidth provisioning, management and traffic grooming, and scaling from 640 Gbps to 48 Tbps. They can switch in both the optical domain at OC rates and in the electrical domain down to STS-1 rates, and offer a host of protection and restoration capabilities associated with SONET networking (Synchronous Optical Networking). "Omnia's products enable intelligent delivery of services to end-users through its next-generation AXR 500 Add-Drop multiplexer utilizing ATM technology." ------ The AXR 500 doing ATM. Could this be an OEM of ASND's 500 box?