The IP Over NBMA (ION) Archive[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] Taxonomy of Routing/Switching Proposals
At 07:03 PM 16-11-96 +0200, Juha Heinanen wrote: >before we start to see lots of other ip switching proposals, it might be >a good idea to develop a method to classify them. Excellent idea. In order to help that process along, I would like to try a different taxonomy for the purpose of discussion and ask the proposers whether this is a correct view and to comment on my points. Class 1) Proposals which maintain ATM signaling Class 2) Proposals which replace ATM signaling with something else In historical order: IP switching is in Class 1) Tag switching is in Class 2) SITA is in Class 2) ARIS is in Class 1) One of the topics of discussion to this point in time has revolved around flow merging. It would seem to me that Class 1) proposals must modify ATM to make this happen. Class 2) proposals don't care, since the ATM flow concept has already been dumped. Another topic discussed has to do with whether the switching device understands IP routing. I think they all do. Another topic has to do with how far the integration process extends. Does the proposal deal with a single device or a network of devices? IP switching deals with a single ATM switch and an outboard controller. Tag switching extends across a domain of networked tag switches. I think SITA is like tag switching in that it extends across a relatively small domain of switches. --Kent |
|