Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

RE: [EFM] Is "campus" P2MP out of scope?

Roy, John,

The PAR says "subscriber access networks".  I agree with you both; that
campus/enterprise networks are out of scope, and not a focus of P2MP.  

Gerry Pesavento 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: John.Egan@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:John.Egan@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 7:51 AM
> To: rabynum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc:
> Subject: RE: [EFM] Is "campus" P2MP out of scope?
> Roy,
> I agree with your position. 
> As you may recall from my PowerPoint submittal to the email 
> reflector of 3-4 weeks ago, I see the marketing potential 
> related to P2MP in an enterprise arena as quite small and so 
> would strongly recommend that any requirements wanted for an 
> enterprise-focused effort be put aside and a focus maintained 
> on the Access arena. There is already enough work before the 
> TF that expanding the effort to focus on a negligible market 
> seems a misuse of resources at present. I recommend finishing 
> the standard development for the core markets (Access) and 
> then the TF considering if it should expend efforts on 
> enterprise related issues.
> John
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roy Bynum [mailto:rabynum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 9:45 AM
> To: howard Frazier
> Cc:
> Subject: [EFM] Is "campus" P2MP out of scope?
> Howard,
> I am seeing several references to a "enterprise" type of "campus" 
> deployment as a target for P2MP optical services.  I may be 
> mistaken, but I 
> thought that this TF was working on support of "subscription 
> networks" 
> which, by my understanding, are commercial service access 
> networks, not 
> enterprise networks.  Am I mistaken?  If I am not, then that 
> would make the 
> need to support enterprise campus networks somewhat out of scope.
> I hate to see a lot of effort put into trying to support 
> campus networks 
> for ubiquitous shared access over optical media.  From my experience, 
> ubiquitous shared networks have an effective utilization of 
> about 30%, 
> depending on the number of nodes on the media.   The support and 
> maintenance of that type of topology in the enterprise campus 
> environment 
> would be very similar to the old "coax" system of years ago.  
> At the lower 
> utilization, an the high maintenance labor costs, the higher 
> cost of the 
> optical media would not be cost effective.  I don't see much 
> of a market 
> for that type of deployment.
> Thank you,
> Roy Bynum