RE: [EFM] Is "campus" P2MP out of scope?
John and Roy
I do not see P2MP as a technology that has a market application in the
campus enterprise space. Is this being proposed on the P2MP reflector?
At 07:51 AM 11/26/2001 -0800, John.Egan@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>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.
>From: Roy Bynum [mailto:rabynum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 9:45 AM
>To: howard Frazier
>Subject: [EFM] Is "campus" P2MP out of scope?
>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.