nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 news
From: Michael.Dillon () btradianz com
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 14:39:33 +0100
Survey says... BZZZZZT.
Yaur argument is fallacious.
Read about SS7 LNP implementation before speaking, please.
I never said anything about SS7 implementation of LNP.
They are very different creatures. Something that resembles telephony
LNP
will not scale to the quantity of micro-streams currently used by WWW applications. The reason it works (FSVO "works") for telephony is
because,
unlike TCP streams, telephone circuits are comparatively large streams
with
much longer keepalive times.
This is a strawman argument. I certainly agree with what you have said about TCP streams versus calls on the PSTN but that has nothing whatsoever to do with what I was talking about. Why is it that whenever people suggest that the IP networking world can learn from the experience of the telephony world, some people assume that the proposal is to imitate the telephony world in every detail? The fact is that both worlds are completely different in the details. But these different details lead the telephony world to make different technology choices and then gain real world operational experience with those choices. As the IP world evolves and changes (remember this started with a discussion of IPv6) it is possible that some of the hard-won experience from the telephony world can be applied in the IP world. No doubt it will be necessary to implement things differently in the IP world because of the details. But it is crazy to reject the hard won experience of the telephony world wholesale just because you worship at the temple of IP. In any case, the telephony world owns and runs the Internet today. Bellhead and nethead arguments belong in the past. Today's bellheads are running IP networks and VoIP along with all the PDH, SDH, X.25, SS7, ATM, Frame Relay etc. --Michael Dillon
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 news, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 news Andre Oppermann (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 news Paul Jakma (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 news Paul Jakma (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 news Andre Oppermann (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 news Paul Jakma (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 news Andre Oppermann (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 news Michael . Dillon (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 news Andre Oppermann (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 news Michael . Dillon (Oct 19)
- Re: IPv6 news Todd Vierling (Oct 19)
- Re: IPv6 news Michael . Dillon (Oct 19)
- Re: IPv6 news Tom Vest (Oct 19)
- Re: IPv6 news John Dupuy (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 news Michael . Dillon (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 news Jeroen Massar (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 news Michael . Dillon (Oct 17)
- geo-based routing [Re: IPv6 news] Pekka Savola (Oct 17)
- Re: non-provider aggregation, was: IPv6 news Iljitsch van Beijnum (Oct 19)
- Re: non-provider aggregation, was: IPv6 news Paul Jakma (Oct 19)
- Re: IPv6 news Gary E. Miller (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 news Michael . Dillon (Oct 18)