From owner-freebsd-isp Tue May 29 20:48:28 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from hecky.it.northwestern.edu (hecky.acns.nwu.edu [129.105.16.51]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 267BA37B424 for ; Tue, 29 May 2001 20:48:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from stuyman@confusion.net) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by hecky.it.northwestern.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id WAA24103; Tue, 29 May 2001 22:48:22 -0500 (CDT) Received: from confusion.net (dhcp089069.res-hall.nwu.edu [199.74.89.69]) by hecky.acns.nwu.edu via smap (V2.0) id xma023976; Tue, 29 May 01 22:47:58 -0500 Message-ID: <3B146D6C.E4EE89F6@confusion.net> Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 22:47:56 -0500 From: Laurence Berland X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bv@wjv.com Cc: Colin Campbell , Christophe Prevotaux , deepak@ai.net, isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: OC48 interface References: <3B12CBBE.567B1A8D@confusion.net> <20010529003126.C3968@wjv.com> <3B1406F2.E4DCBD0F@confusion.net> <20010529200519.B11016@wjv.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Bill Vermillion wrote: > I'm still learning all this too but from what I've read the opinions > are the OC-768 won't happen because SONET is a TDM [Time Division > Multiplexing] method and carries a lot of overhead with it. AFAIK TDM isn't frowned upon all that much. It carries overhead as far as someone needing to provide clock, but it seems like the best way to make truly separate channels in the same band on the same fibre/pair/transmitter area. Or CDM, I suppose. Ethernetish technologies are better, IMHO, for things where you just want a big fat pipe. I guess this is why bandwidth ppl like it, but for traditional telco stuff you might want sonet. > > Speeds will be there, but it just won't be SONET. I remember > sitting through some tutorials about 2 years ago - and Ciena > was calling all the SONET upgrades 'fork lift upgrades' because it > doesn't upgrade that well. I'm guessing this has to do with the timeslices getting smaller, but I really don't know enough to say (if anyone wants an intern who will work for cheap, loves unix, and wants to learn all the crazy network stuff, please email me!!!). > > It makes sense. I know that were I have some machines located [in > a Level 3 facility] they say their goal is to drop all SONET and > become a pure IP transport. I assume by IP u mean ethernet or some similar technology with IP running on it, or am I being dense again. > > If I'm mis-understanding this, please let me know. > I think we're both on the right track. I wish I had more experience in all this... > Bill > -- Laurence Berland Northwestern '04 stuyman@confusion.net http://www.isp.northwestern.edu/~laurence "The world has turned and left me here" To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message