The IP Over NBMA (ION) Archive

[Tom Lyon <pugs@ipsilon.com>]

It is straightforward to have ATM signalling running in parallel
with IP Switching; but irrelevant to most customers.
Why? Because the installed base of ATM signalling is quite small -
IP Switching targets the installed base of IP.

Also, ATM to the desktop has stalled, so ATM will rarely be 
end-to-end, whereas IP is often end-to-end. Therefore, the IP
approach to QoS, RSVP, will be what applications use more often.


At 06:49 PM 12/10/96 +0100, Claude Castelluccia wrote:
>
>After reading the paper "FLow Labelled IP: A Conneclionless
>Approach to ATM", I have a question that can not go out of my
>mind, so I'll ask it to you....
>
>In IP Switching, most of the ATM signaling has been removed such that
>if someone want to have strict QoS guaranties, he needs to use a resource 
>reservation protocol such as RSVP... my question is then: why not also keep ATM
>signaling software such that one can also use ATM signaling to establish
>a connection and make some resource reservation?  This solution would have 
>the advantage to be ATM-compatible!
>
>Am I missing something? 
>
>Thanks!
>
>Claude.
>
>
---
Tom Lyon                    232 Java Dr.            fon:+1 408-990-2001
Chief Technical Officer     Sunnyvale, CA. 94089    fax:+1 408-743-5678
Ipsilon Networks, Inc.                   pugs@ipsilon.com