I am just curious as to why SNA still runs on tokenring today. Is there any
reason that it cannot just hook right into an ethernet network?? I have
read a few white papers on SNA, and I assume that because tokenring was the
major LAN media back in the day, and because SNA uses RIF's to
read AK2 Robert J [EMAIL PROTECTED]@groupstudy.com on
13.10.2000 02:04:11
Please respond to Alldread AK2 Robert J [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Cisco@Groupstudy. Com (E-mail)" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject: SNA: why tokenring?
I am just curious as to
-mail)" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject: SNA: why tokenring?
I am just curious as to why SNA still runs on tokenring today. Is there
any
reason that it cannot just hook right into an ethernet network?? I have
read a few white papers on SNA, and I assume that because tokenring was the
major
, and
not just right off of the access server. Just my uneducated 2 cents
Brian
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED],Alldread AK2 Robert J
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: SNA: why tokenring?
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 16:17:06 +0300
I think it does run over
At 08:19 AM 10/12/00, Alldread AK2 Robert J wrote:
I am just curious as to why SNA still runs on tokenring today.
IBM got their foot in the door at many large companies and then closed the
door behind them. The end result is that many companies deployed all
IBM-developed technologies. If a
At 08:19 AM 10/12/00, Alldread AK2 Robert J wrote:
I am just curious as to why SNA still runs on tokenring today.
IBM got their foot in the door at many large companies and then closed the
door behind them. The end result is that many companies deployed all
IBM-developed technologies. If a
Not to shift the subject, but if you need the consistent latency and
reliability for multimedia, why not go with ATM? The bandwidth available
is better than Token ring and the cost isn't *that* much more.
In any case, SNA over Ethernet is no problem in a well-designed
network. As Priscilla
You are not really going to get the full benefits of going ATM to the
desktop until the Apps running on the client are ATM aware.
Running LANE or doing 1483 is still not going to give you a good COS as you
would be using AAL5 anyway, which is UBR.
Some VTC ( Video Teleconferencing ) vendors
Agreed. I think my brain was on vacation when I read your original post;
sorry for any confusion. Chalk it up to a very long day. :-)
Anyway, I did some large scale video-conference setups a number of years
ago and my only choice for reliability, CODEC to CODEC, was ATM. We had
excellent
9 matches
Mail list logo
