Frame Relay encap vis-a-vis point-to-point at UUNET

Tue Sep 22 13:34:40 UTC 1998

Charles Sprickman wrote:
> 
> Please, share...
> 
> I like the CT3 card, but I'm not familiar (except as a customer) with the
> Cascade solution and its benefits beyond economics...

Well, they cost an arm and a leg for one.  You get some really nice port
density, but your per-port costs can be pretty high.  With a CT3IP, the best
you can do is 28 T1s per cisco slot.  With the frame relay solution,
theoretically you can do several times that many T1s per HSSI port.  You
will only notice this if many of your customers only use a small fraction of
their T1.  This is the same as the standard packet-switched versus
circuit-switched argument.

I personally like the CT3IPs as well, but they only address half of what the
Cascade solution addresses.

Alec

-- 
+-------------------------------------+----------------------------------+
|Alec H. Peterson - ahp at hilander.com  | Lead Network Architect           |
|http://www.hilander.com              | Erols Internet - an RCN Company  |
+-------------------------------------+----------------------------------+
Got clue?  Come to ISPF '98, http://www.ispf.com