North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
- From: Stephen Sprunk
- Date: Wed Jun 29 15:22:19 2005
Thus spake "James Laszko" <email@example.com>
> Most MPLS networks use a combination of point to point, frame
> and ATM facilities as the infrastructure. The phone companies
> use ATM just about everywhere to deliver voice across their
Some may. I know of at least one that moves all their LD voice traffic via
VoIP on a private POS/MPLS network. Most won't admit one way or the other
unless you're under NDA and have a need to know.
Getting back to the OP's question, I'd rather build a new private network
via carriers' MPLS (e.g. TLS) offerings. The ATM cell tax, as well as the
high cost of interfaces (compared to either POS or Ethernet), is simply not
worth the supposed benefits. You'll get equally bad service regardless of
the technology chosen -- spend your money on getting them to manage the CPE
(no finger-pointing) and better SLAs (you'll at least get money back when,
not if, you have problems).
> I don't see ATM/FR equipment being EOL'd anytime in the near
I think talking about EOS/EOL is jumping the gun, but most of it hasn't seen
any new development (or speed increases) in quite a while. The telcos are
going to milk that sunk investment for as long as customers are willing to
pay for it, and the vendors are happy to sell them replacement cards, but
few if any people are designing new ATM cards or new ATM networks. FR will
live on long after ATM is dead and gone because it fits a distinct customer
demand (cheap, simple, and very slow) with no reasonable replacement.
Stephen Sprunk "Those people who think they know everything
CCIE #3723 are a great annoyance to those of us who do."
K5SSS --Isaac Asimov