At 06:32 PM 8/3/98 , Christian Kuhtz wrote:
| Okay, so given all the great features that ATM is supposed to have | and the only thing that really sucks about it is the overhead due to the 53 | byte cell size, the obvious question is why can't there be an ATM standard | with, say, 197 ( 4 times the current 48 byte payload) or even 389 ( 8 | times 48 ) byte cells? | Is there something magic about 53 or is the IP over ATM application | still so 'obscure' that there is no interest?
The old story was that the Telco guys wanted 32 byte payload and the data guys wanted a 64 byte payload and the ITU split the difference. Go figure. TORRENT NETWORKING TECHNOLOGIES CORP Next Generation Routing and Services George Janosik Sr Systems Engineer New Business Development 412.851.1103 gjanosik@torrentnet.com <http://www.torrentnet.com/>http://www.torrentnet.com