On Fri, 20 Dec 1996, Jim Van Baalen wrote:
I have a question that fits this topic. Why does everybody seem to be so sold on Gigaswitch based Xchange points? I know that the busiest, highest membership NAPs are of this design, but with all the associated problems
I think the biggest reason the busiest and highest membership NAPs are using Gigaswitches because they work. When we were looking for a switch for the Atlanta-NAP we almost with with a Stratacom switch, but the Gigaswitch looked like a better start. We plan on adding a Stratacom
It is my opinion that the most promising architecture today is PBNap. The StrataCom switches far exceed Gigaswitch in addressing issues such as flow control, buffering, and aggregate throughput (which may not be comparable when, as with Gigaswitch, port congestion is such a bottleneck). In addition, with new line cards due out early next year, the BPXs will support ABR and, relatively speaking, huge buffers at high density OC3 and 2 port OC12.
Well when they get that out, and fix a few other problems it may be ready.
I know that ATM is a nasty word (or should I say acronym) to many on this list, but even some of the greatest ATM critics admit that it is a reasonable LAN technology. As far as the popular packet shredder (sp?) argument goes, I don't think that it relevant on any switch that supports EPD.
Just curious to see other perspectives.
Jim
Nathan Stratton CEO, NetRail, Inc. Tracking the future today! --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Phone (703)524-4800 NetRail, Inc. Fax (703)534-5033 2007 N. 15 St. Suite 5 Email sales@netrail.net Arlington, Va. 22201 WWW http://www.netrail.net/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Matthew 6:34