Subject: Re: Proposed way to move forward re ATM/MPLS

From: Eric Rosen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 02 May 2002 16:48:42 -0400

John> How can  someone complain  about the "Cell  Tax" and TCP  ACK messages
John> taking up two cells, then argue that efficiency of ATM over PSN is not
John> important?  

I think the argument is that if you care a lot about efficiency, then you'll
avoid cell mode  altogether.  On the other hand, if  you're using cell mode,
then you're incurring the cell tax and apparently don't care that much about
efficiency.  

You  might not  find  this argument  persuasive,  but it  is not  internally
inconsistent in the way you are suggesting.

---

From: Jim Harford <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 02 May 2002 17:37:17 -0400

Step #1 is to make sure the intended applications work.  Some applications 
are more sensitive than others about various aspects of ATM service 
transparency (e.g. ATM security, voice, ATM signaling).  Once this has been 
accomplished, step #2 is to make it efficient.

This results in different requirements for different 
applications.  However, each of the application classes would benefit from 
attention to efficiency.  Can we agree on this?

Jim Harford