Cell Relay Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>List Archive>month:1997-Jun> msg00099



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

Re: Question on IP with ATM (oil and water)

  • From: Jim Jackson <jj@scs.leeds.ac.uk>
  • Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 11:16:46 +0100 (BST)

Really helpful to the guy aren't you? He has local ATM - he has wide area
ATM and asks a question about the best way to link? And you suggest he
uses different technology!!

Ok I suggest the best way is connect an extra line from asx200 to an extra
line asx1000 directly.  The router connects as before to both switches. 
Usual IP will still traverse the router, but direct ATM applications can
do direct ATM connections, certainly using PVCs (if you can handle coping
the various management domains :-) and maybe using signalling depending on
whether and what the WAN ATM uses for signalling.

Also you may be able to get IP addresses from the IP network that links
the WAN connected routers, so that you can configure a second virtual IP
interface on any ATM connected hosts so that their IP traffic avoids the
local router. When/if NHRP (or similar) etc etc gets deployed - it may be
possible to do all this a little simpler - at least for small numbers in
trials!!

Jim Jackson

On 11 Jun 1997, David Vlack wrote:

> 
> 
> Mahesh V. Tripunitara <tripunit@cs.purdue.edu> wrote in article
> <5nmh7a$2d3$1@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu>...
> > What is the "best" way to bypass the router and connect the Asx 200
> > switches to the Asx 1000 directly? Should we run IP over ATM instead of
> > LANE in all the hosts? Is that the answer?
> > ...
> > Thanks very much,
> > Mahesh.
> > -- 
> ATM and IP are like oil and water. Why not use ATM only for wide area
> access and stick with fast Ethernet switching except when you must chop
> those packets into those tiny ATM cells because you can't get a real
> circuit to where you want to go for the same price or less than a virtual
> one.
> 
>