Peter Lothberg writes:
1. You need routers in and out of your cloud if your service is IP.
Very true. However this load can be distributed among multiple routers.
STM-4 (packets) as router interfaces will be availiable when needed.
The problem here is that one cannot purchase a router that will run for next six months to be obsolete. Or at least one should not have. The STM-4 interfaces should be available today, not when you happen to need them. The STM-4 ATM interfaces are here today.
Definetly we do. The problem here is that we're a generation away from routers that would go STM4. And maybe generation and half away from routers that would maintain fairness and maybe even QoS across them at the same time they go STM4 on a dozen interfaces.
Go read the latest issues of the trade-press like communications week.
Trade-press moves bits very badly. The QoS there is equal to multicolor slides.
Where the current POS pipe is, is a perfect place for 'ATM-less' circuit. When you say that you're going to do the next circuit locally, that makes me wonder of the benefits. If you would run the STM4 halfway across the globe, I would understand the benefits of being free of cell tax.
It will take until 1998 before there will be cablesystsems along the path that can give me a oc12c/stm-4, but we will have inside Sweden.
TAT12/13 runs at dual STM-16 so where is the problem :-)
It has been more stable than any other international circiut we have, and the 'new' technology works great.
On which of the submarine cables it runs on, btw?
tat12/13, rioja, odin, denmark, se-dk-17.
So taking into account that most of the intercontinental cable breaks have been on the Atlantic hop of the cable, we can say that the research that went into the current design of submarine cables has paid of in reliability (as it was planned to do) Note that FLAG uses the same physical design, so who's going to run the first STM-1 POS to Japan? Pete