Subject: Re: [MOBILE-IP] Applicability of IP Mobility to CDMA Soft Handoff

From: Arek Dadej <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 6 May 2000 01:02:12 +0930

Andrew,
I tend to agree with the first statement (even if it applies to fixed access
networks). However, your second statement is rather far going, if you consider
switching of high volume, aggregated traffic. Why is it that truly high
capacity, gigabit IP routers somehow cannot do without underlying ATM
switching?
--Arek

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew T. Campbell
To: [email-masked]
Sent: 5/6/00 3:56 AM
Subject: Re: [MOBILE-IP] Applicability of IP Mobility to CDMA Soft Handoff

My personal view is ATM and virtual cicuits complicate
the design of the access network and are not needed.

Packet based link layers will win - ATM is dead.

---

From: Grenville Armitage <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 09:56:04 -0700

[..]
> Why is it that truly high

Actually, gigabit routers no longer need underlying ATM switching.
Consider the use of IP/PPP/SONET interfaces on such routers, running
at OC-48c and recently OC-192c. These speeds exceed what commercial
IP/ATM ports run at (although ATM switching at OC-48c exists, SAR
is problematic at such speeds). As an interesting wrinkle, operators
concerned about traffic engineering are deploying such routers with
packet-based MPLS in order to support non-shortest path forwarding.

cheers,
gja
________________________________________________________________________
Grenville Armitage                    http://members.home.net/garmitage/
Bell Labs Research Silicon Valley