SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI)

Paul Ferguson pferguso at
Fri Mar 29 05:47:10 UTC 1996

At 12:36 AM 3/29/96 -0500, Shikhar Bajaj wrote:

>Several of our clients seriously consider
>ATM/SONET the best way to go because they feel that a switched
>technology like ATM is the best single technology (currently) 
>to offer them high speed and support for multiple applications (like
>video and voice, as well as data).  They are not just sending around
>200-byte IP packets.  Furthermore, the ability to get
>quality of service support and guarantees is important them.  They don't
>think that RSVP, when it comes, will be enough.  Finally,
>to them, the economics makes sense.  They understand the limitations
>(i.e. overheads) and believe that they are acceptable. 

What you fail to mention, however, is that in an effort to achieve
these noble goals across the Internet, you are relegated to using IP
over ATM. This is the fatal flaw.

Sorry. I remain unconvinced.

Unless you begin building massive [native] long-haul ATM networks, this
is not an acceptable transport for the reasons I mentioned earlier.

- paul

More information about the NANOG mailing list