nanog mailing list archives
Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI)
From: Sean Doran <smd () icp net>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 20:09:43 -0000
| Ok, I will bite. Let's assume for a moment that dual DS3 is not | acceptible and I want IMUXed DS3s or a real optical interface. What do | you recommend for a Cisco? I would recommend talking to your sales representative about getting an NDA presentation. | ATM has the annoying advantage of having alot of people building for it. Gee, there are lots of OSI vendors too. Go for it. You can leverage the fun stuff done by CDNNET. :-) Sean.
Current thread:
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI), (continued)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Larry J. Plato (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Sean Doran (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Eric M. Carroll (Mar 29)
- RE: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Shikhar Bajaj (Mar 29)
- RE: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Shikhar Bajaj (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Vadim Antonov (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) @NANOG-LIST (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Vadim Antonov (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Vadim Antonov (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) @NANOG-LIST (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Sean Doran (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Eric M. Carroll (Mar 29)
- RE: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Bharat Ranjan (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Sean Doran (Mar 29)
- Re: SONET Interconnect (was RE: MCI) Eric M. Carroll (Mar 29)