Re: Optical Crossconnects and IP

[Bora Akyol <akyol () pluris com>]

I agree that a more dynamic optical infrastructure allows an IP network to be
established faster and better (in terms of flexibility), but I disagree with
the point of view that expects routers to dynamically establish, modify and
tear-down circuits to other routers on demand. First of all, the current (IGP)
routing protocols don't have a clue on who they want to talk to, they talk to
whoever is out there and answers their HELLOs. Secondly, we tried this before
(ATM) and it did not work.

The current ODSI work has the concept of dynamic provisioning completely
upside down, IMHO.

Bora

Tony Li wrote:

> >  PS I keep wondering why people keep reinventing virtual circuits.
>
> A key observation here is that the point of an optical cross connect is to
> provide a real circuit, not a virtual one.
>
> An optical cross connect, functioning along with IP routing and an
> intelligent traffic management system can be used to dynamically place
> bandwidth where it is needed, when it is needed.  The optical plane
> provides an active provisioning fabric, allowing the network to be more
> efficient.  And a more efficient network makes for a more profitable ISP.
>
> I don't see optical cross connects as an opposition to IP technology.
> Rather, it provides one of the key means of automating the network that is
> sorely needed.  A much better question to ask is: can IP routing possibly
> survive its projected growth curve without the enabling technology that a
> flexible optical fabic provides?
>
> Yours in dissent,
> Tony
>
> p.s. Just in case there's any confusion out there, I'm still the world's
> biggest proponent of IP routing.  I just don't assume that we know
> everything about networking already.  I hope that it can be made better.