MCI [ATM overhead]

Paul Ferguson pferguso at
Wed Mar 20 04:21:48 UTC 1996

At 07:51 PM 3/19/96 -0800, Jim Forster wrote:

>There's beginning to be some expectation that there will be a transmission
>capacity crunch in the carrier's Sonet nets, and this ~25% ATM cell tax may
>be looked at carefully as packet over Sonet solutions emerge.

I think it will be critically important, especially in long-haul
interconnect scenarios.

Historically speaking, as providers have replaced congested links
with faster ones, they have also become quickly congested. And since
these high-speed long-haul links are not cheap, you can bet that these
organizations want to get the most bang-for-the-buck. I can't imagine
that ~25% bandwidth overhead would be acceptable, especially when
more efficient alternatives exist.

Nice synopsis, Jim.

- paul

More information about the NANOG mailing list