Mobile Operator Connectivity

Sun Oct 10 20:39:52 UTC 2010

On 10/10/10 12:38 PM, Cameron Byrne wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 10:42 AM, Joel Jaeggli <joelja at bogus.com> wrote:
>> On 10/9/10 5:08 PM, Ryan Finnesey wrote:
>> LTE provides an opportunity to move the bottleneck.
>>
> 
> LTE provides some latency benefits on the wireless interface, but the
> actual packet core architecture is very similar to GSM / UMTS.

right, renaming the the GPRS Core Network to SAE doesn't really impart
much magic to it. the air interface is certainly better. If the PDN
gateways in an LTE deployment are located solely in the same locations
as the former GGSNS then yeah your topoly is going to look almost identical.

> For those concerned about latency, the key is working with the
> wireless operator to find where the mobility aggregation points are
> and how they are connected to the Internet.  More advanced
> applications at large scale can justify direct peering, but i don't
> imagine that achieves much real latency benefits over just being
> properly coordinated with the locations and ISPs.
> 
> Cameron
> =======
> http://groups.google.com/group/tmoipv6beta
> =======
> 