Re: Very fast IP, no ATM...

[Peter Lothberg <]

> Hi, all of you,
> 
> ok, congratulation, 'no ATM'  - but:
> 
> Don't you feel sometimes in all this fine argumentation against ATM
> a certain intellektuelle Unredlichkeit (intellectual dishonesty)?
> 
> Why?
> 
> 'ATM said' from the beginning: We can do everything - the
> telephone system, eventually the video distribution and data.
> 
> Did anybody in the `integrated services packet network' camp
> claim: We can run the world-wide telephone system say by IPv6
> over SDH?
> 
> (or would this be a non-goal?, or do we say, ATM also
>   wouldn't run the phone system, and so on;
>  years ago we had IBM's
>   packet transfer mode ... and so on)
> 
> 
> Yours
> 
> 
> Paul Christ


I don't undertsand, if ATM did create bandwith it would be great, but
it does not. If ATM was needed to make packets move it would be great,
but it's not.

It seems to be usable as aa replacement for X.25 and Frame-Relay, for
those who buy bandwith and routers and build private networks, but,
for a public infrastructure, I don't think so.

As the service deleiverd at the endpoint is IP, we need to
interconnect the various parts of IP moving clouds, so we will have to
have IP-switches (called routers) that go damn fast anyway.

So, explain what's the problem here, I just demostrated that you can
run production IP traffic at 155Mbit without making a detour through
an ATM switch. 

It has been more stable than any other international circiut we have,
and the 'new' technology works great.


--Peter