From: Kent (cciecn@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed May 31 2000 - 13:44:04 GMT-3
I have seen some old networks use LANE in Lan, it was
for the 622 speed, I guess, but right now we have
Gigabit and ethernet channels, I do not see too many
points of using LANE in Lan. It makes more sense to me
that LANE is kind of extending Lans accross wan.
Kent
--- Earl Aboytes <earl@linkline.com> wrote:
> I used to work for the national ATM group at GTE.
> We would use LANE to
> trunk ATM across the WAN.
>
> I never worked with SVC's. We have customers
> running SVC's but I could not
> tell you their reasons for doing so.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Earl Aboytes
> Senior Technical Conultant
> GTE Managed Solutions
> 805-381-8817
> earl.aboytes@telops.gte.com
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com
> [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of Jeff
> Sapiro
> Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 7:07 AM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: ATM PVC vs. SVC vs. LANE
>
> My only experience with ATM is at a large ISP that
> used PVC spokes for it's customers. I'm studying
> the
> configs for SVC's, CLIP, and LANE, and I don't see
> the
> advantage of using these, other than dynamic address
> resolution. LANE seems particularly complex for this
> small piece of functionality. Anybody have real
> world
> examples of where these approaches are more
> appropriate than PVC's? It would really help my
> understanding of the configs.
> -Jeff
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:23:32 GMT-3