> In other words, CTR-21 will become necessary, but probably will never > be sufficient. 'Tis a wonderful thing, to be sure, but also a bit > of a two-edged sword?
Scott, that is no different than the situation we've had in the USA and Canada for many years. Part 68 and CS-03 do not in any way guarantee compatibility with the different networks. They have a very limited set of objectives in trying to prevent "Harm to the NetworK". If you're concerned about compatibility (will the thing work) than you have to buy the standards published by Committee T1, to get one step closer to your target. Only problem is, there is no such a thing as a homogenous public network and different services are often provuded somewhat differently by different equipment from different manufacturers. Telephone companies therefore, in North America, must disclose their interface standards for different services. That is what is proposed in Europe. I don't think they are asking for "Notified Networks" , they are asking for "Notified Interfaces". In North America that still leads to problems because you do not know exactly what locations use Lucent switches, what locations use Nortel switches, what locations use GTE switches, etc., etc. Perhaps, with the still more or less "national" manufacturers being dominant in Europe that will be a bit easier for now. Another issue will become that the Telephone company does not necesarily buy all interfaces on a switch that the switch is capable of. So the fact that you know what the interface for this, that, or the other thing is for each switch, and the fact that you know where all these switches are, still does not mean that the switches are equipped with all those interfaces. There are economics for the Telcos in where they spend money and where they do not. Hope you're confused at a higher level now. Ciao, Vic
