& cplSiteName &
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View        ADD A COMMENT
<<   <   Page 2 / 31   >   >>
technoboy
technoboy
12/5/2012 | 1:55:34 AM
re: Pradeep Sindhu, Juniper Networks
re post 7

What does this have to do with the price of tea in China??
technonerd
technonerd
12/5/2012 | 1:55:33 AM
re: Pradeep Sindhu, Juniper Networks
You simply have never been associated with these type of businesses. Thats why things move very slowly.
Thanks for pointing this out to the propellerheads, seven. They have so many blind spots, including:

1. Service availability. It takes a real propellerhead to actually attack the PSTN for its nasty habit of being up too much of the time.

2. Incremental capital spending. Propellerheads are so enthused about their toys that they forget that real people and telecom carriers see it as a mere tool. Forklift upgrades are personna non-grata in the telecom world.

3. Long service lives. Propellerheads don't seem to understand that the average age of the telecom plant is 8 to 10 years, and that new stuff is purchased with an assumption of 20 years or more in service. Maybe not 40 years like the old Western Electric days, but not 2 years like the propellerheads want it to be.

4. Legacy services die very slowly. There are still rotary phones in service. I know of people who still had party lines in the late 1990s, and were pissed off when they were converted.

5. A lifeline is a lifeline. Propellerheads assume that everyone is in the 20s or 30s. No one is disabled. Everyone is really interested in computers and phones and how they work. There are never any emergencies, and if people die because the toy didn't work it's the stupid customer's fault. Well, that kind of thinking doesn't cut it in the mass market.

6. Newer should be better. If you're going to replace someone's phone service, propellerheads would be well advised not to have the new service work less often, sound worse and be harder to use than what came before it.
Tony Li
Tony Li
12/5/2012 | 1:55:25 AM
re: Pradeep Sindhu, Juniper Networks

Ya know, all of the points that you make are simply myths. Reasonably enlightened data networking folks understand all of this.

More light, less heat, please.

Tony
CoolLightGeek
CoolLightGeek
12/5/2012 | 1:55:19 AM
re: Pradeep Sindhu, Juniper Networks
Any decent mechanic has more than one tool in her box.

A real manageable network of grand scale needs layers. The US telecom transport networks transitioned from analog to streaming digital data transmission in the 60's and the 70's. The layers of the network were simply hierarchical pipes of TDM riding on coax, radio and waveguide.
The 80s and 90s brought with in packets, fiber, wireless and WDM. Today's and tomorrow's packet technologies can help reduce the number of layers needed to support new services but any real entity of any size needs to deal with pipes.

The future is still destined to be a mix of pipes, packets and streams. It will never be just a single pipe of packets.

I have yet to read a Nethead willing to concede that there is a limit what packet switches will gooble up and still be willing to call themselves a Nethead.

In the 80s, and early 90's, a Bellhead embraced relatively slowly evolving Bell System centric technology standards. Today's Bellhead is currently defined as one who does not assume that "stick it in a packet" is the only answer needed to any telecom question. Bellheads have historically been interested in a wide range technology for telecom (including packets).
Integrating packet technology into the toolbox of a Bellhead seems to be a smaller stretch than creating an entire telecom toolbox for a Nethead.

Actually, I think there has been substantail cross-pollenation between the two groups but there still seem to be some number of evangelical Netheads that boast a fair amount that their current technological breadth is all that is needed in the telecom network of the future.

Its not that the Netheads have not "won": its more that the Bellheads have accepted a greater role for packets in the context of the full range of technologies that define telecom.

Can't we all just get along?

CLG


PO
PO
12/5/2012 | 1:55:18 AM
re: Pradeep Sindhu, Juniper Networks
Bellheads have historically been interested in a wide range technology for telecom (including packets).

Personally, I think that just as the "ATM vs. IP" debate is over, most are starting to realize that packets are carried over circuits (of varying, and sometimes variable, dimension). It just isn't as easy as it once was to characterize the Bellhead / Nethead positions anymore. (Perhaps on their differing approaches to reliability?)

One quip I'll long remember is Larry Roberts (he now of Caspian fame) suggesting (at ACM SIGCOMM) that a significant failure of ATM was that its 'creators' believed that a 'packet' had to be a constant size in order to efficiently cross a switching fabric.

That one statement captures, IMHO, a little over a generation of networking development. And it was both "bellheads" and "netheads" who led us all down the road.
technoboy
technoboy
12/5/2012 | 1:55:14 AM
re: Pradeep Sindhu, Juniper Networks
Re Post 11

So the Public Internet is the same as the PSTN. Is this the premise? Are you making this statement based on the use of the same layer 1 physical plant. It seems a strange statement to make.
technoboy
technoboy
12/5/2012 | 1:55:12 AM
re: Pradeep Sindhu, Juniper Networks
Re Post 10

I think you are intermixing my statements with Packet Man. I never stated that packet has won and circuit is dead. I have stated that the PSTN and packet networks will co-exist for some period of time. Given that it is the year 2004, your statement that circuit will remain in place for the next century is a little pre-mature. Since neither of us will be around to find out who was right it is probably not worth taking it further. Finally, I would not presume to know what your experience is in the industry so you should not presume to know what my experience is.
technoboy
technoboy
12/5/2012 | 1:55:11 AM
re: Pradeep Sindhu, Juniper Networks
Re Post 13

Amen!!!!
technonerd
technonerd
12/5/2012 | 1:55:00 AM
re: Pradeep Sindhu, Juniper Networks
So the Public Internet is the same as the PSTN. Is this the premise? Are you making this statement based on the use of the same layer 1 physical plant. It seems a strange statement to make.
Why is it a strange statement? Physically speaking, there is no such thing as the Internet. I think it's an important little fun fact for people to keep in mind. I see a lot of discussions, and in fact some regulatory decisions, that appear to be based on the idea that there is a physical entity called "the Internet" that exists apart from the PSTN.

Oh, and by the way, most of the time it's a common infrastructure up through Layer 2, and occasionally higher.
Tony Li
Tony Li
12/5/2012 | 1:54:56 AM
re: Pradeep Sindhu, Juniper Networks
I have yet to read a Nethead willing to concede that there is a limit what packet switches will gooble up and still be willing to call themselves a Nethead.
-------------


Ok, then let's fix that right now. There's a limit to what packet switching can and should be used for. Use the right tool for the job at hand, taking cost, reliability, speed, etc. into account. Do I really want my bank running transactions over the Internet? Not without some crypto than is far stronger than what I know of. Do I want my 911 call routed over the Internet? No thank you, the technology is too immature and frankly, that's one thing that I'm just not willing to gamble with yet. Give it another 100 years or so.

Just because you CAN do something doesn't make it the best way to do something. As someone very wise once taught me: "Don't fall in love with the technology. There's always something better around the bend." Turning things into a religious debate is NOT the sign of a good engineer. A good engineer should be trying to look at things as objectively as possible, understand that all technologies have limitations, and optimize to meet requirements. That's it.

Does that help?

Tony
<<   <   Page 2 / 31   >   >>


Featured Video
Upcoming Live Events
October 22, 2019, Los Angeles, CA
November 5, 2019, London, England
November 7, 2019, London, UK
November 14, 2019, Maritim Hotel, Berlin
December 3-5, 2019, Vienna, Austria
December 3, 2019, New York, New York
March 16-18, 2020, Embassy Suites, Denver, Colorado
May 18-20, 2020, Irving Convention Center, Dallas, TX
All Upcoming Live Events
Partner Perspectives - content from our sponsors
Multiband Microwave Provides High Capacity & High Reliability for 5G Transport
By Don Frey, Principal Analyst, Transport & Routing, Ovum
5G + Cloud + AI + Ecosystem, Opening New World of Video
By Samuel Chen, President, Cloud & Data Center Marketing, Huawei
All Partner Perspectives