nanog mailing list archives
Re: Optical Crossconnects and IP
From: Tony Mumm <tonym () netins net>
Date: Mon, 08 May 2000 16:19:41 -0500
It seems that the goal is to apply IP packets right onto the lambda windows. But without any ability to provide IP QoS, it seems like a point of diminishing return. Hop-by-hop routing is on its way out....and not soon enough. As for reinventing the virtual circuit, I don't think we can get much lower than this. -tm Vadim Antonov <avg () kotovnik com> wrote
** Disclaimer; I work for a vendor: PLURIS, but this question concerns a personal curiosity that I have about OXCs. **Disclaimer: I do not work for a vendor: PLURISI also don't see much NSP participation in the relevant standards bodies about signaling in optical networks.Probably because the said standards bodies (and on-demand fiber capacity allocation in general) have little relevance to the NSPs and Internet backbones in general? --vadim PS I keep wondering why people keep reinventing virtual circuits.
Current thread:
- Optical Crossconnects and IP Bora Akyol (May 08)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Optical Crossconnects and IP Vadim Antonov (May 08)
- Re: Optical Crossconnects and IP Tony Mumm (May 08)
- Re: Optical Crossconnects and IP smd (May 08)
- Re: Optical Crossconnects and IP Howard C. Berkowitz (May 08)
- Re: Optical Crossconnects and IP David Diaz (May 08)
- Re: Optical Crossconnects and IP Howard C. Berkowitz (May 08)
- Re: Optical Crossconnects and IP Vadim Antonov (May 08)
- Re: Optical Crossconnects and IP Tony Mumm (May 09)
- Re: Optical Crossconnects and IP Craig Partridge (May 09)
- Re: Optical Crossconnects and IP Tony Mumm (May 09)
- Re: Optical Crossconnects and IP Tony Li (May 09)
- Re: Optical Crossconnects and IP Bora Akyol (May 09)
- Re: Optical Crossconnects and IP Thomas P. Brisco (May 09)
- Re: Optical Crossconnects and IP Wayne Bouchard (May 09)
- Re: Optical Crossconnects and IP Bora Akyol (May 09)
(Thread continues...)