Merit Network
Can't find what you're looking for? Search the Mail Archives.
  About Merit   Services   Network   Resources & Support   Network Research   News   Events   Home

Discussion Communities: Merit Network Email List Archives

North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Exchanges that matter...

  • From: Tim Salo
  • Date: Thu Dec 05 10:53:52 1996

> Subject: Re: Exchanges that matter... 
> Date: Fri, 29 Nov 1996 11:02:24 -0800
> From: Paul A Vixie <paul@vix.com>
> 	[...]
> ... and they aren't subject to ATM's cell tax ...

I am surprised, (well, maybe not), that you aren't concerned about
the excessive overhead present in FDDI networks...

-tjs

From: salo@msc.edu (Tim Salo)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 1996 14:50:11 -0500 (CDT)

> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 1996 14:28:27 -0400
> From: Paul Ferguson <pferguso@cisco.com>
> 	[...]
> Recall Jerry Scharf's numbers; they're indicative of the issue.
> 	[...]
> HDLC framing bytes =   3080633605		HDLC efficiency = 97.72
> ATM framing bytes =   3644304857		ATM efficiency = 82.61
> ATM w/snap framing bytes =   3862101043	ATM w/snap efficiency = 77.95

At a certain point, some of these arguments about ATM efficiency sound a bit
like saying FDDI is terrible because 4B/5B encoding is only 80% efficient.

I think a more interesting measure of the value of ATM versus other 
wide-area technologies is some sort of measure of throughput per dollar.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -




Discussion Communities


About Merit | Services | Network | Resources & Support | Network Research
News | Events | Contact | Site Map | Merit Network Home


Merit Network, Inc.