Cell Relay Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>List Archive>month:2000-Aug> msg00031



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

Re: ATM vs. Frame Relay

  • From: Thomas Frieling <thomas.frieling@arcormail.de>
  • Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 13:28:02 +0200
  • Organization: keine
  • X-Complaints-To: abuse@arcor-ip.de



Charles McCane schrieb:
> 
> (...)
> Today, large ATM networks rely on dynamic routing protocols  such as PNNI
> which is based on Dykstra's SPF algorithm. "Soft" PVC's and SVC's are
> automatically rerouted when network failures occur. With our carrier ATM
> switches, the reroute occurs much faster than with typical IP solutions such
> that no data connections over the ATM network will time out. 

PNNI has no built in rerouting capabilities, has it? Nortel
Passport for example uses standard OAM-cells to detect a failure
and then initiates the PNNI-based setup of a new SPVC (if it is
configured to do so).
I think only vendor specific call routing protocols like Lucent's
VNN may have rerouting features built in. Or have I overlooked
something new? 

> (...)
> FYI, a "Soft" PVC is nothing more than an SVC that is nailed up permanently.

... by operators and not by endsystems/users.

Thomas Frieling

(comp.dcom.lans.ethern is not reachable via my usenet access)

> 
> --
> Charles McCane
> Senior Systems Engineer
> Lucent  Technologies - Service Provider Networks
> MCIWorldcom Account Team Dallas, TX.