""Steven A. Ridder"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I understand the technology and stand by whoever said what IP telephony/VoIP > isn't a bandwidth hungry app. It isn't. G.729, which can use as little as > 8k with proper compresion, has nearly the same MOS score as G.711, which is > toll quality. Even though it's not officially "toll quality" I consider it > toll quality, as I can't tell the difference, and most people couldn't > either. Even if using G.711, I can still use compression and VAD to get > down to 25K or so, which isn't bandwidth hungry in my book either. > > I think the apps that will be on a converged network in the future will be > bandwidth hungry, such as video. Voice isn't. >
CL: I don't think the issue is the bandwidth taken by one compressed call. The issue is poisson 99. I think that's how the telco guys call it. What happens when a significant number of calls "must" go through - say during an emergency? CL: current telco networks are engineered such that you get dial tone 99.5% of the time you go off hook, day or night, busy hour or not. the VoIP netowork must not only operate at that kind of reliability, but must tramsmit data simultaneously. CL: This rush to converged networks means not only reinventing what the telcos have already done, but building out a whole new infrastructure as well. There is at least one school of thought that calls this a dead end. CL: one of the bad things that has come out of Microsoft is the attitude that Mainframe computers are just PC's with a little bit more horsepower and that the internet is just a bigger version of the Microsoft campus network, with a few more hubs involved. I see one of the bad things about Cisco's vision of converged networks is the attitude that the Telephone Network is nothing more than just the Cisco campus telephone network with a few more phones attached. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Joe A > > To: 'Nathan Chessin'; 'Albert Lu'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 10/14/02 11:52 AM > > Subject: RE: Cisco ExecNet > > > > Maybe I should say IP Telephony, not VoIP. How many uncompressed, > > toll-quality calls can you push out simultaneously over a T1??? Have > > you done the math? 24? Maybe 23 on a good day. Sure, if you use > > compression you can squeeze in quite a bit more, but you can't deny that > > IPT is bandwidth-hungry, with streaming MOH, voicemail audio streams, > > the calls themselves. Believe me, VoIP is absolutely a bandwidth-hungry > > app. No one who understands the technology would deny that. > > > > Joe > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Nathan Chessin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 1:56 AM > > To: 'Joe'; 'Albert Lu'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: Cisco ExecNet > > > > > > 1) Since when is VoIP a "bandwidth-hungry app" > > > > Nate > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > > > > > Joe > > > Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 8:42 PM > > > To: 'Albert Lu'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: RE: Cisco ExecNet > > > > > > > > > Technology isn't necessarily heading in that direction - Cisco is > > > driving it there. Bottom line is this: Cisco is traditionally a > > > router and switch manufacturer, and no one buys routers and switches > > > these days, at least not enough to provide continued growth for Cisco. > > > Company infrastructures are already built, have been for > > > years, and are > > > running for the most part nowhere near capacity. These technology > > > applications, besides generating hardware sales directly, will also > > > increase bandwidth consumption, thereby causing indirect > > > hardware sales > > > when customers upgrade their routers and switches to support the new > > > bandwidth-hungry apps like VoIP. If Cisco can drive the customers' > > > purchases in that direction, they win. > > > > > > My two cents. > > > > > > Joe > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On > > > Behalf Of > > > Albert Lu > > > Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 8:16 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: OT: Cisco ExecNet > > > > > > > > > Hello Group, > > > > > > Has anyone checked out the Cisco ExecNet, which is basically thoughts > > > about where technology is heading in the future from the VPs at Cisco. > > > > > > http://newsroom.cisco.com/dlls/tln/execnet/ > > > > > > >From what they are saying (specifically Mike Volpi), the > > > direction for > > > technology is heading towards: CDN, Security, Wireless, IP Telephony, > > > VPN. Reegineering business processes to best utilise these > > > technologies in order to improve productivity and reduce cost for > > > enterprises. > > > > > > Does anyone have any comments about this, and where money > > > will be spent > > > in the future for technologies? > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Albert Lu > > > CCIE #8705 Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=55605&t=55573 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
