North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: Exchanges that matter...
- From: Tim Salo
- Date: Fri Dec 06 10:31:16 1996
> Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 14:56:00 -0800
> From: Vadim Antonov <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> To: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: Exchanges that matter...
> Cc: email@example.com
[slashing and reordering your response slightly]
> ATM as a LAN is probably ok, if it can compete with Gb Ethernet
Precisely my point, (which you managed to delete in your response).
Price/performance seems like a pretty good analysis technique, at
least for technologies that pass some basic hurdles, like "working."
> FDDI is not a WAN technology. Losing 20% of bandwidth of a 10 ft
> piece of fiber is one thing. Losing 20% of bandwidth of a
> $3M/yr circuit is quite different.
I don't understand. Are you trying to say that price/performance
analysis is appropriate for LAN technologies, but not for WAN technologies?
Now, I could understand if you said, "I analyzed ATM WAN services for
one configuration once and concluded that other technologies provided
better cost/performance in all possible configurations," or even
"I don't think ATM products and standards are mature enough for my
application." However, you seem to be saying that wide-area technologies
should be assessed based on total cost and overhead, rather than on
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -