x
<<   <   Page 2 / 6   >   >>
mgillespie 12/5/2012 | 1:21:29 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead [email protected]#
I agree, long gone are the days that when a 20Km piece of dark fiber is purchased everyone bricks themselves. We no longer need to purchase expensive SDH/SONET tin to spit a packet further than across the corridor.
Despite this, and speaking as a 'nethead' I can't help but cough when everyone starts shouting for the death of all things telco. It's just not going to happen any time soon.

IP kit is edging it's way in from the outside inwards, I agree! But an absolute death of SONET? Grow up.

Seasons change my friends, and as they do new technologies shall emerge and mature. However, not only are 90% of ethernet based l2 mpls vpns carried using IPoverSDH, I am not seeing options on GBICs suitable for transcontinental interlinks.
Telco equipment has had eons to mature, and provides SLA's that IP equipment isn't even close to meeting.
I agree, Ethernet is kicking butt, and shall not reach it's zenith for quite some time. I disagree that SONET is dead.
opticalwatcher 12/5/2012 | 1:21:29 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead "Wait till WiFi finishes off the margins in cellular."

When your car breaks down on some backwater road, you've got a long walk to the nearest Starbucks so you can call for help on your WiFi phone.

Oh, and DSL has long been in a price war with Cable, and the Bells are doing just fine, thank you.
douggreen 12/5/2012 | 1:21:28 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead "can say is that can anyone name a SINGLE router vendor that can legitimately claim 5 9's?"

daofamunky,

It's much more than just 5 9's reliability on the equipment side. That's actually the easier part. It's the reliability of the network as a whole thats much more complex in the telco world.

On the other hand, I have to agree that there are many things about the culture of the RBOCs that we could live without. Even the RBOCs themselves would like to change faster.
dadofamunky 12/5/2012 | 1:21:28 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Douggreen wrote:

"Most Bellheads don't understand how the relatives simplicity of an enterprise makes their operating systems and hardware seem like overkill. Most enterprise (and Internet) people don't understand what it means to manage billions of connections and a network that covers hundreds of thousands of route-miles. To them it's just a "cloud" that is always there."

Douggreen, that is just about the best summary of the two camps I've ever seen. I've worked on the data side for some time and just jumped over to a company that's a lot closer to the telco side; all I can say is that can anyone name a SINGLE router vendor that can legitimately claim 5 9's?

Didn't think so.

OTOH, if it wasn't for the IP guys the telcos would not be FINALLY offering better broadband options and being forced to compete and change their operations as much as they are.
stephenpcooke 12/5/2012 | 1:21:27 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Here is something that I have been saying for over 10 years now:

"SONET will die, but it will be killed by SDH."

My reasoning was the global expansion of the various big players in the US, keeping operations costs down by buying a single type of equipment (ie: SONET vs. SDH). These reasons have pretty much disappeared but the imminent death of Telcordia may bring it about sooner rather than later. Unless the industry as a whole can figure out what to do with the standards part of Telcordia, SONET may well die.

As most line interface ASICs have supported both SONET & SDH via a software switch for many years now, there may well be some new software releases that re-configure networks from SONET to SDH.

Food for thought.

Steve.
DoTheMath 12/5/2012 | 1:21:26 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead "Wait till WiFi finishes off the margins in cellular."
tera wrote>

When your car breaks down on some backwater road, you've got a long walk to the nearest Starbucks so you can call for help on your WiFi phone.

Oh, and DSL has long been in a price war with Cable, and the Bells are doing just fine, thank you.
---
I said "it will finish off the *margins*" in cellular, not "finish off cellular". Read it carefully before mouthing off. If 50% of cellular traffic moves to Wi-Fi (my rough estimate is that at least 50% of cellular calls are made within buildings), cellular margins *are* finished.

"Bells are doing just fine" - that is news to me. Last I heard, they are losing access lines like crazy, and it is accelerating. Serves them right, for all their arrogance and outmoded ITUtitudes.
laserbrain2 12/5/2012 | 1:21:26 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead >>"Network managers won't accept the bandwidth without the control," he said. "This will be a very different market than the 90s, where bandwidth was everything," Stitt said.

Stanley emphasized that point in a later session, noting that Gigabit Ethernet had been presented to the world as a "dumb pipe" that happened to be really fast. The same tactic won't work this time. "We've now moved on to 10 Gbit/s, and QOS is important because of the new applications," he said.
<<

Ahh the classic Ethernet myth. We've been b.s.ing about Ethernet QOS for ten years now. Gotta do something to differentiate the commodity. The fact is, it is almost always easier to throw another link at the problem rather than come up with some scheme for prioritizing some bits over others; it has to get configured and tested and monitored and tweaked.

Stanley's quote is the best, they didn't use QoS at 1Gig even though we thumnped about it but now they will because the 10x improvement in bandwidth is going to be consumed by some "new applications." What new applications? Napster?

Ethernet QoS is like a pimped-out Hyundai. You bought the car because it is cheap. Some guys think the chicks are gonna dig it, but most of the time it's a halfassed implementation and doesn't get anyone any action.
opticalwatcher 12/5/2012 | 1:21:25 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Sorry about the last post--slip of the mouse.
-------------
"Bells are doing just fine" - that is news to me. Last I heard, they are losing access lines like crazy, and it is accelerating. Serves them right, for all their arrogance and outmoded ITUtitudes."
-------------
Gee, did you bother to check your facts before posting? Here's a couple of articles for your enjoyment:
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103...
http://www.journalnow.com/serv...

-----------------
If 50% of cellular traffic moves to Wi-Fi (my rough estimate is that at least 50% of cellular calls are made within buildings), cellular margins *are* finished.
-----------------

So you're saying that since 50% of cellular calls are made within buildings, they'll be made by a WiFi phone. The other 50% will be made by cell phone presumably. The problem is that this requires you to carry around two phones and have two phone numbers. (Unless you think that there are two kinds of people: those that spend their entire life inside buildings and those who spend their entire life on the road. This might mathematically explain your logic).

Actually, if I'm at work, I use the work phone on my desk. I think I spend about 3% of my time at a place where I could conceivably use a WiFi phone. The cell phone is required at all other times, so I don't think the cell phone companies are too worried about losing my business. Maybe you're one of those who spends all their time in buildings without a work phone. I suggest you get out more.

opticalwatcher 12/5/2012 | 1:21:25 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead >"Bells are doing just fine" - that is news to >me. Last I heard, they are losing access lines >like crazy, and it is accelerating. Serves them >right, for all their arrogance and outmoded ITUtitudes.
alchemy 12/5/2012 | 1:21:25 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Personally, I think SONET is going to vanish in many networks. 10GigE is going to ride the typical Ethernet price curve and interfaces will be cheap and ubiquitous. There will never be enough SONET gear to drive the prices down.

Resilient Packet Ring / IEEE 802.17 does a fairly good job of providing the 50 mSec protection switching attribute of SONET and you can use cheap Ethernet PHYs on your ring. RPR has QoS built in so it's a reasonable platform to do VoIP distribution in the metro area. Since redundancy and QoS are built into the link layer, you don't necessarily have to muck with IP routing or MPLS so the boxes that push the bits around can be relatively cheap bridges instead of expensive routers. It's not optimized for TDM data but the trend is that TDM is being replaced by VoIP among the IXCs.

<<   <   Page 2 / 6   >   >>
HOME
Sign In
SEARCH
CLOSE
MORE
CLOSE