Re: TransAtlantic Cable Break

["Christian Kuhtz" <kuhtzch () corp earthlink net>]

Yes, definitely.  Convergence isn't all it's cracked up to be alright.. But it likely is also because of different 
design goals.

Convergence doesn't have to suck, it just does more so at the moment because we still have an amalgam of technologies 
dealing largely only with expression of convergence rather than convergence as an integral part of the technology 
itself.

And what you describe is a reflection of that.

Or that's what I think. 

Best regards,
Christian

--
Sent from my BlackBerry.      

-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Donelan <sean () donelan com>

Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 08:22:47 
To:"Chris L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow () verizonbusiness com>
Cc:nanog <nanog () merit edu>
Subject: Re: TransAtlantic Cable Break



On Mon, 25 Jun 2007, Chris L. Morrow wrote:
> I suppose if you had some special traffic you could qos up that and down
> everything else but that wasn't quite what Simon was getting at I don't
> think.


Although we may think IP is everything, Internet traffic is not the 
only type of traffice carried by telecommunication transmission systems.
If you take the entire cable system from a transmission engineer's point 
of view, it looks different than from an IP engineer's point of view.

Remember last year during the earthquake near Tawain, air traffic control 
and pstn voice capacity came back faster than Internet capacity.

Convergence isn't all its cracked up to be.