nanog mailing list archives
Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI)
From: Tim Bass (@NANOG-LIST) <nanog () dune silkroad com>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 12:03:25 -0500 (EST)
Fletcher replies:
I see no "of course." Are there some applications which require this level of service in a WAN? Probably. Are there many? Probably not. Is end-to-end relability and performance more important for the *vast* majority of applications? Yes!
I'll concede the fact that the number of 'surf the net' applications far exceed the number of real-time systems in the Internet. But, we am working on a WAN project that required real time data delivery every few seconds across the US to numerous sites. Even though the numbers are few *today* they do exist and are growing in number and complexity. In fact, there are numerous applications and system designs just waiting for the 'network to support real-time services.' Just because real-time services are in the minority of datagram services, does not translate to 'the world should not support real-time services'. If that is the logic that is used to make decisions, then let's stop funding libraries because the vast majority get their information from television! Real-time WAN services with concrete .99999+ availability of QoS is one of the growth areas of the next decade, BTW, and is a much differnet service that providing access so 'Joe&Judy surf-the-net' can pull down yet another file. There are numerous applications for real-time datagram delivery systems. ATM may not be the underlying transport, as mentioned; but there is an emerging market for .99999+ datagram services. The average IP provider may never see this market, but believe me, they exists. High regards, Tim
Current thread:
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI), (continued)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Paul Ferguson (Mar 28)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Shikhar Bajaj (Mar 28)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Mike Trest (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Per Gregers Bilse (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Dorian Kim (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Curtis Villamizar (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Paul Ferguson (Mar 28)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Paul Ferguson (Mar 28)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Paul Ferguson (Mar 28)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) @NANOG-LIST (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Fletcher Kittredge (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) @NANOG-LIST (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) @NANOG-LIST (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Steve Steinberg (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Larry J. Plato (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Eric M. Carroll (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) @NANOG-LIST (Mar 29)