Re: DSL over Frame Relay [7:76443] posted 09/30/2003
- Subject: Re: DSL over Frame Relay [7:76443]
- From: "nrf" <noglikirf@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 13:47:37 GMT
""Howard C. Berkowitz"" wrote in message
> At 10:45 AM +0000 9/30/03, nrf wrote:
> >""Steven Meier"" wrote in message
> >> I must be thick......or having a blonde day...but DSL over frame relay
> >> impossible as they are 2 different hardware transport platforms.
> >> DSL is ATM and uses completely different hardware than a frame relay
> >> which uses PVC's etc whether permanent or semi permanaent.
> >> The packet structure is different as well.
> >> or am I completely blonde.
> >I don't want to comment on your hair-color, but you can indeed have DSL
> >frame-relay. It's rare, but some DSLAM vendors support it. While DSL is
> >usually backhauled through ATM, this is not necessarily so - any backhaul
> >mechanism can be used in theory. It all depends on what the vendor
> >and how the service-provider wants to build the network.
> Well, I confess to being confused by this thread, even though I'm
> more hair-challenged. I have no difficulty understanding the use of
> DSL as a first-mile access technology to FR, as ISDN, dial and even
> X.25 have been used for years.
> But DSL, to the best of my knowledge, is a physical layer
> specification, full of modulations, medium requirements, etc., that
> feeds bit streams into a DSLAM, which may pass along bit streams on
> ATM, or, if the DSLAM contains layer 2 or 3 functionality, pass
> frames or packets. ADSL, SDSL, ISDL, VHSDL, etc., don't specify
> frames, to the best of my knowledge.
> We speak glibly of Ethernet-over-whatever, but we really are speaking
> there of 802.3 frames, not Manchester-encoded baseband signals or
> optical or broadband equivalents, or the OC-192 PHY for 10 GE.
> DSL-over-whatever sounds like the equivalent of Manchester over
> frame, essentially an analog-to-digital process.
> Have people been using sloppy terminology or am I missing something
Well, I don't know about other people here, but I can say that I am
purposefully using sloppy terminology. Or, should I say, I am using very
loose, marketing-oriented definitions of technology. Why am I doing this?
Because I recognized that the syntax of this thread was loose, so I
responded in kind. When in Rome...
> **Please support GroupStudy by purchasing from the GroupStudy Store:
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
Message Posted at:
**Please support GroupStudy by purchasing from the GroupStudy Store:
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html