RE: [EFM] Network timing, ATM, ADSL/VDSL and EFM
Fletcher,
Can I assume that based on your comments EFM is only going to achieve an
"interim" solution, because all EFM tries to do is to achieve a more
efficient solution than ATM with respect to delivering IP data. I assume it
is interim because I assume that people want an ultimate convergence of
all-in-one transport. If this is true, why do people not want a transmission
mechanism that transports data, voice and video, but only data? If this is
not true, I guess that convergence is only one of the fancy subjects being
talked about, something that will never happen.
I am only trying to understand better what EFM stands for convergence.
Thanks,
Dong
So we use ATM any time its price drops below 70% for a compariable
fixed bandwidth circuit. ATM is not evil; it is just not efficient
for IP.
> If EFM is only for data, it is a better choice than ATM. But if EFM is to
> provide data, voice, and video, I doubt. Any people have idea what the
cost
> to provide video, voice, and data by EFM compared to ATM ?
I could not agree more! This was the point I was trying to make. If
you want timed service to provide data, voice and video over the same
circuit, the existing ATM protocols are the best protocols I know of
to provide those services. I don't understand why people think we can
take the same design goals as ATM for EFM and do a better job this
time around.
regards,
fletcher