At 11:23 AM 03/03/2003 -0500, Tyler Durden wrote:
Maybe they actually plan on making their money from selling those SDKs!
(Perhaps they hope for some trickle down from the all the $ startups get
for making Powerpoint slides.)
And I see they don't really have an architecture suitable for SONET-mapped
services...gotta be 1GbE or 2GbEs maped over OC-48 or a single 10GbE
(802.11 WAN).
and some time around then, also wrote
> You'd need a chip for every POS/PPP/HDLC connection in the SONET signal.
> This could be a single connection (unlikely, OC-192c is rare), or hundreds
> (DS-1s? If not, 16 STS-3cs).
I don't know the SPI-3 / SPI-4 interfaces, but it sounds like this is
meant to sit on the electronics side of things, not the optics,
which you'd handle on separate components.
Devices that say "2-10Gbps" are usually either talking about GigE
(2Gbps for bidirectional) or OC48 or up to OC192 / 10GigE
(though that really needs 20Gbps to cover both directions.)
This really is an appropriate scale for a device -
if you want to encrypt individual data streams on an OC48,
you do that at the edges before feeding them to routers or muxes,
so your PPP comment isn't relevant. It's an IPSEC processor,
which says it's handling a combined big fat IP stream on a router/switch,
not a bunch of layer 2 encapsulations of individual IP streams,
so it's for people like big ISPs and big hosting centers and big LANs.
If you're trying to do link encryption on arbitrary muxed SONET,
that's a job for a physical layer raw-bits link encryptor, not IPSEC.
