muxing T1's vs DS-3

Discussion in 'Cisco' started by P.Schuman, Jun 7, 2007.

  1. P.Schuman

    P.Schuman Guest

    what options are available from the carriers for the local loop
    into either an old Frame or new MPLS network
    when we need more than a single T1, but less than a DS-3

    What about the copper vs fiber issue....
    if we only have copper avail going into our facility.

    PS - any other newsgroups where this non-specific hardware vendor,
    and more carrier oriented discussions might take place ?

    tnx -
     
    P.Schuman, Jun 7, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. P.Schuman

    stephen Guest

    "P.Schuman" <> wrote in message
    news:DpZ9i.11456$...
    > what options are available from the carriers for the local loop
    > into either an old Frame or new MPLS network
    > when we need more than a single T1, but less than a DS-3


    If you have to get into a F/relay cloud then the best you can do is
    probably N * T1 - either treat them as a line group or just partition your
    PVCs down different pipes.

    An alternative that was popular in Europe was to use IMA to aggregate
    several E1s into a bigger logical ATM pipe - you lose maybe 15% to cell
    overheads, but the balancing happens per cell, so you get very good
    utilisation of all the pipes.

    MPLS is the way to go for more choices - uk fix for the same kind of in
    between speeds is 10 Mbps Ethernet as a tail (or SDH on a CPE mux at your
    site) - but you need fibre access for it.

    You can get higher speed than T1 on ADSL / SDSL, and maybe find a telco who
    allows bonding? Some of the systems (pairgain?) will bond multiple SDSL
    links and present it as Ethernet.

    Finally - work supports Ethernet over microwave as a tail at up to 100
    Mbps - but you need a carrier that supports it, and line of sight to an
    equipped mast.

    Given the costs for microwave, dishes et al it may be cheaper to get fibre
    installed anyway (depending on how far you are from a useable duct) - and
    the fibre will give you a way to get to 1 Gbps and higher.
    >
    > What about the copper vs fiber issue....
    > if we only have copper avail going into our facility.


    if you can get fibre and it is reasonable cost, then do it.
    >
    > PS - any other newsgroups where this non-specific hardware vendor,
    > and more carrier oriented discussions might take place ?


    you could always start one :)
    >
    > tnx -

    --
    Regards

    - replace xyz with ntl
     
    stephen, Jun 7, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. P.Schuman

    P.Schuman Guest

    tnx for the info -
    I guess I'm looking at how to accomplish the N*T1 physically ?
    We had previously used Sprint - and they offered muxing T1's
    using the Datalink ? mux.

    BUT - that required the carrier to have one on their end,
    and offer the service.

    SO - just checking to see what's around (in the US)
    that is offered from the carrier,
    and what hardware is required to performing the muxing function.

    We have a location where the 40 year old telco conduit is totally full,
    and for a new fiber run,
    they need to cut across the street, some land, parking areas, etc
    to even get to the physical building entrance...


    "stephen" <> wrote in message
    news:pZ_9i.16040$...
    > "P.Schuman" <> wrote in message
    > news:DpZ9i.11456$...
    > > what options are available from the carriers for the local loop
    > > into either an old Frame or new MPLS network
    > > when we need more than a single T1, but less than a DS-3

    >
    > If you have to get into a F/relay cloud then the best you can do is
    > probably N * T1 - either treat them as a line group or just partition your
    > PVCs down different pipes.
    >
    > An alternative that was popular in Europe was to use IMA to aggregate
    > several E1s into a bigger logical ATM pipe - you lose maybe 15% to cell
    > overheads, but the balancing happens per cell, so you get very good
    > utilisation of all the pipes.
    >
    > MPLS is the way to go for more choices - uk fix for the same kind of in
    > between speeds is 10 Mbps Ethernet as a tail (or SDH on a CPE mux at your
    > site) - but you need fibre access for it.
    >
    > You can get higher speed than T1 on ADSL / SDSL, and maybe find a telco who
    > allows bonding? Some of the systems (pairgain?) will bond multiple SDSL
    > links and present it as Ethernet.
    >
    > Finally - work supports Ethernet over microwave as a tail at up to 100
    > Mbps - but you need a carrier that supports it, and line of sight to an
    > equipped mast.
    >
    > Given the costs for microwave, dishes et al it may be cheaper to get fibre
    > installed anyway (depending on how far you are from a useable duct) - and
    > the fibre will give you a way to get to 1 Gbps and higher.
    > >
    > > What about the copper vs fiber issue....
    > > if we only have copper avail going into our facility.

    >
    > if you can get fibre and it is reasonable cost, then do it.
    > >
    > > PS - any other newsgroups where this non-specific hardware vendor,
    > > and more carrier oriented discussions might take place ?

    >
    > you could always start one :)
    > >
    > > tnx -

    > --
    > Regards
    >
    > - replace xyz with ntl
    >
    >
     
    P.Schuman, Jun 7, 2007
    #3
  4. P.Schuman

    John Agosta Guest

    Call Charles Industries in Rolling Meadows, Illinois.
    They offer a DS3 mux....

    http://www.charlesindustries.com/acquisition/m13_multiplexers.htm

    -ja





    "P.Schuman" <> wrote in message
    news:ii%9i.11483$...
    > tnx for the info -
    > I guess I'm looking at how to accomplish the N*T1 physically ?
    > We had previously used Sprint - and they offered muxing T1's
    > using the Datalink ? mux.
    >
    > BUT - that required the carrier to have one on their end,
    > and offer the service.
    >
    > SO - just checking to see what's around (in the US)
    > that is offered from the carrier,
    > and what hardware is required to performing the muxing function.
    >
    > We have a location where the 40 year old telco conduit is totally full,
    > and for a new fiber run,
    > they need to cut across the street, some land, parking areas, etc
    > to even get to the physical building entrance...
    >
    >
    > "stephen" <> wrote in message
    > news:pZ_9i.16040$...
    >> "P.Schuman" <> wrote in message
    >> news:DpZ9i.11456$...
    >> > what options are available from the carriers for the local loop
    >> > into either an old Frame or new MPLS network
    >> > when we need more than a single T1, but less than a DS-3

    >>
    >> If you have to get into a F/relay cloud then the best you can do is
    >> probably N * T1 - either treat them as a line group or just partition
    >> your
    >> PVCs down different pipes.
    >>
    >> An alternative that was popular in Europe was to use IMA to aggregate
    >> several E1s into a bigger logical ATM pipe - you lose maybe 15% to cell
    >> overheads, but the balancing happens per cell, so you get very good
    >> utilisation of all the pipes.
    >>
    >> MPLS is the way to go for more choices - uk fix for the same kind of in
    >> between speeds is 10 Mbps Ethernet as a tail (or SDH on a CPE mux at your
    >> site) - but you need fibre access for it.
    >>
    >> You can get higher speed than T1 on ADSL / SDSL, and maybe find a telco
    >> who
    >> allows bonding? Some of the systems (pairgain?) will bond multiple SDSL
    >> links and present it as Ethernet.
    >>
    >> Finally - work supports Ethernet over microwave as a tail at up to 100
    >> Mbps - but you need a carrier that supports it, and line of sight to an
    >> equipped mast.
    >>
    >> Given the costs for microwave, dishes et al it may be cheaper to get
    >> fibre
    >> installed anyway (depending on how far you are from a useable duct) - and
    >> the fibre will give you a way to get to 1 Gbps and higher.
    >> >
    >> > What about the copper vs fiber issue....
    >> > if we only have copper avail going into our facility.

    >>
    >> if you can get fibre and it is reasonable cost, then do it.
    >> >
    >> > PS - any other newsgroups where this non-specific hardware vendor,
    >> > and more carrier oriented discussions might take place ?

    >>
    >> you could always start one :)
    >> >
    >> > tnx -

    >> --
    >> Regards
    >>
    >> - replace xyz with ntl
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
     
    John Agosta, Jun 8, 2007
    #4
  5. P.Schuman

    Guest Guest

    We use partial DS3. Populate channels as required. Or for INET, upgrade
    spead as requried,
    Only good if you start out with at least 8 T1 for voice. SCB/AT&T uses the
    MX2800 on the CPE side for the Mux t1 used for Voice/Data.
    For Inet they just install a router with DS3. Then charge for bandwidth as
    ordered..

    Assuming your entrance has some coax available.

    If you are cocerned with only data muxing using T1's to transport for the
    purpose of establing higher spead internet then all the major mfr have IMA
    cards for their routers to inverse multiplex T1s. Cisco's IMA works well.
    Not sure about Nortel IMA cards. The previous statement of ATM cell
    overhead applies.

    Chris



    "P.Schuman" <> wrote in message
    news:ii%9i.11483$...
    > tnx for the info -
    > I guess I'm looking at how to accomplish the N*T1 physically ?
    > We had previously used Sprint - and they offered muxing T1's
    > using the Datalink ? mux.
    >
    > BUT - that required the carrier to have one on their end,
    > and offer the service.
    >
    > SO - just checking to see what's around (in the US)
    > that is offered from the carrier,
    > and what hardware is required to performing the muxing function.
    >
    > We have a location where the 40 year old telco conduit is totally full,
    > and for a new fiber run,
    > they need to cut across the street, some land, parking areas, etc
    > to even get to the physical building entrance...
    >
    >
    > "stephen" <> wrote in message
    > news:pZ_9i.16040$...
    >> "P.Schuman" <> wrote in message
    >> news:DpZ9i.11456$...
    >> > what options are available from the carriers for the local loop
    >> > into either an old Frame or new MPLS network
    >> > when we need more than a single T1, but less than a DS-3

    >>
    >> If you have to get into a F/relay cloud then the best you can do is
    >> probably N * T1 - either treat them as a line group or just partition
    >> your
    >> PVCs down different pipes.
    >>
    >> An alternative that was popular in Europe was to use IMA to aggregate
    >> several E1s into a bigger logical ATM pipe - you lose maybe 15% to cell
    >> overheads, but the balancing happens per cell, so you get very good
    >> utilisation of all the pipes.
    >>
    >> MPLS is the way to go for more choices - uk fix for the same kind of in
    >> between speeds is 10 Mbps Ethernet as a tail (or SDH on a CPE mux at your
    >> site) - but you need fibre access for it.
    >>
    >> You can get higher speed than T1 on ADSL / SDSL, and maybe find a telco
    >> who
    >> allows bonding? Some of the systems (pairgain?) will bond multiple SDSL
    >> links and present it as Ethernet.
    >>
    >> Finally - work supports Ethernet over microwave as a tail at up to 100
    >> Mbps - but you need a carrier that supports it, and line of sight to an
    >> equipped mast.
    >>
    >> Given the costs for microwave, dishes et al it may be cheaper to get
    >> fibre
    >> installed anyway (depending on how far you are from a useable duct) - and
    >> the fibre will give you a way to get to 1 Gbps and higher.
    >> >
    >> > What about the copper vs fiber issue....
    >> > if we only have copper avail going into our facility.

    >>
    >> if you can get fibre and it is reasonable cost, then do it.
    >> >
    >> > PS - any other newsgroups where this non-specific hardware vendor,
    >> > and more carrier oriented discussions might take place ?

    >>
    >> you could always start one :)
    >> >
    >> > tnx -

    >> --
    >> Regards
    >>
    >> - replace xyz with ntl
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
     
    Guest, Jun 8, 2007
    #5
  6. P.Schuman

    P.Schuman Guest

    tnx - I'll take at look at the various router vendors for Inverse Muxing
    cards...
    what model is the Cisco IMA ?? and what model is the Nortel IMA ??

    BTW - this is our situation....
    > We have a location where the 40 year old telco conduit is totally full of

    twisted pair,
    > and for a new fiber run,
    > they need to cut across the street, some land, parking areas, etc
    > to even get to the physical building entrance...


    <> wrote in message
    news:gL0ai.7229$...
    > We use partial DS3. Populate channels as required. Or for INET, upgrade
    > spead as requried,
    > Only good if you start out with at least 8 T1 for voice. SCB/AT&T uses the
    > MX2800 on the CPE side for the Mux t1 used for Voice/Data.
    > For Inet they just install a router with DS3. Then charge for bandwidth as
    > ordered..
    >
    > Assuming your entrance has some coax available.
    >
    > If you are cocerned with only data muxing using T1's to transport for the
    > purpose of establing higher spead internet then all the major mfr have IMA
    > cards for their routers to inverse multiplex T1s. Cisco's IMA works well.
    > Not sure about Nortel IMA cards. The previous statement of ATM cell
    > overhead applies.
    >
    > Chris
    >
    >
    >
    > "P.Schuman" <> wrote in message
    > news:ii%9i.11483$...
    > > tnx for the info -
    > > I guess I'm looking at how to accomplish the N*T1 physically ?
    > > We had previously used Sprint - and they offered muxing T1's
    > > using the Datalink ? mux.
    > >
    > > BUT - that required the carrier to have one on their end,
    > > and offer the service.
    > >
    > > SO - just checking to see what's around (in the US)
    > > that is offered from the carrier,
    > > and what hardware is required to performing the muxing function.
    > >
    > > We have a location where the 40 year old telco conduit is totally full,
    > > and for a new fiber run,
    > > they need to cut across the street, some land, parking areas, etc
    > > to even get to the physical building entrance...
    > >
    > >
    > > "stephen" <> wrote in message
    > > news:pZ_9i.16040$...
    > >> "P.Schuman" <> wrote in message
    > >> news:DpZ9i.11456$...
    > >> > what options are available from the carriers for the local loop
    > >> > into either an old Frame or new MPLS network
    > >> > when we need more than a single T1, but less than a DS-3
    > >>
    > >> If you have to get into a F/relay cloud then the best you can do is
    > >> probably N * T1 - either treat them as a line group or just partition
    > >> your
    > >> PVCs down different pipes.
    > >>
    > >> An alternative that was popular in Europe was to use IMA to aggregate
    > >> several E1s into a bigger logical ATM pipe - you lose maybe 15% to cell
    > >> overheads, but the balancing happens per cell, so you get very good
    > >> utilisation of all the pipes.
    > >>
    > >> MPLS is the way to go for more choices - uk fix for the same kind of in
    > >> between speeds is 10 Mbps Ethernet as a tail (or SDH on a CPE mux at your
    > >> site) - but you need fibre access for it.
    > >>
    > >> You can get higher speed than T1 on ADSL / SDSL, and maybe find a telco
    > >> who
    > >> allows bonding? Some of the systems (pairgain?) will bond multiple SDSL
    > >> links and present it as Ethernet.
    > >>
    > >> Finally - work supports Ethernet over microwave as a tail at up to 100
    > >> Mbps - but you need a carrier that supports it, and line of sight to an
    > >> equipped mast.
    > >>
    > >> Given the costs for microwave, dishes et al it may be cheaper to get
    > >> fibre
    > >> installed anyway (depending on how far you are from a useable duct) - and
    > >> the fibre will give you a way to get to 1 Gbps and higher.
    > >> >
    > >> > What about the copper vs fiber issue....
    > >> > if we only have copper avail going into our facility.
    > >>
    > >> if you can get fibre and it is reasonable cost, then do it.
    > >> >
    > >> > PS - any other newsgroups where this non-specific hardware vendor,
    > >> > and more carrier oriented discussions might take place ?
    > >>
    > >> you could always start one :)
    > >> >
    > >> > tnx -
    > >> --
    > >> Regards
    > >>
    > >> - replace xyz with ntl
    > >>
    > >>

    > >
    > >

    >
    >
     
    P.Schuman, Jun 8, 2007
    #6
  7. P.Schuman

    MattG Guest

    On Jun 7, 7:25 pm, "P.Schuman" <>
    wrote:
    > tnx - I'll take at look at the various router vendors for Inverse Muxing
    > cards...
    > what model is the Cisco IMA ?? and what model is the Nortel IMA ??
    >
    > BTW - this is our situation....
    >
    > > We have a location where the 40 year old telco conduit is totally full of

    > twisted pair,
    > > and for a new fiber run,
    > > they need to cut across the street, some land, parking areas, etc
    > > to even get to the physical building entrance...

    > <> wrote in message
    >
    > news:gL0ai.7229$...
    >
    >
    >
    > > We use partial DS3. Populate channels as required. Or for INET, upgrade
    > > spead as requried,
    > > Only good if you start out with at least 8 T1 for voice. SCB/AT&T uses the
    > > MX2800 on the CPE side for the Mux t1 used for Voice/Data.
    > > For Inet they just install a router with DS3. Then charge for bandwidth as
    > > ordered..

    >
    > > Assuming your entrance has some coax available.

    >
    > > If you are cocerned with only data muxing using T1's to transport for the
    > > purpose of establing higher spead internet then all the major mfr have IMA
    > > cards for their routers to inverse multiplex T1s. Cisco's IMA works well.
    > > Not sure about Nortel IMA cards. The previous statement of ATM cell
    > > overhead applies.

    >
    > > Chris

    >
    > > "P.Schuman" <> wrote in message
    > >news:ii%9i.11483$...
    > > > tnx for the info -
    > > > I guess I'm looking at how to accomplish the N*T1 physically ?
    > > > We had previously used Sprint - and they offered muxing T1's
    > > > using the Datalink ? mux.

    >
    > > > BUT - that required the carrier to have one on their end,
    > > > and offer the service.

    >
    > > > SO - just checking to see what's around (in the US)
    > > > that is offered from the carrier,
    > > > and what hardware is required to performing the muxing function.

    >
    > > > We have a location where the 40 year old telco conduit is totally full,
    > > > and for a new fiber run,
    > > > they need to cut across the street, some land, parking areas, etc
    > > > to even get to the physical building entrance...

    >
    > > > "stephen" <> wrote in message
    > > >news:pZ_9i.16040$...
    > > >> "P.Schuman" <> wrote in message
    > > >>news:DpZ9i.11456$...
    > > >> > what options are available from the carriers for the local loop
    > > >> > into either an old Frame or new MPLS network
    > > >> > when we need more than a single T1, but less than a DS-3

    >
    > > >> If you have to get into a F/relay cloud then the best you can do is
    > > >> probably N * T1 - either treat them as a line group or just partition
    > > >> your
    > > >> PVCs down different pipes.

    >
    > > >> An alternative that was popular in Europe was to use IMA to aggregate
    > > >> several E1s into a bigger logical ATM pipe - you lose maybe 15% to cell
    > > >> overheads, but the balancing happens per cell, so you get very good
    > > >> utilisation of all the pipes.

    >
    > > >> MPLS is the way to go for more choices - uk fix for the same kind of in
    > > >> between speeds is 10 Mbps Ethernet as a tail (or SDH on a CPE mux at your
    > > >> site) - but you need fibre access for it.

    >
    > > >> You can get higher speed than T1 on ADSL / SDSL, and maybe find a telco
    > > >> who
    > > >> allows bonding? Some of the systems (pairgain?) will bond multiple SDSL
    > > >> links and present it as Ethernet.

    >
    > > >> Finally - work supports Ethernet over microwave as a tail at up to 100
    > > >> Mbps - but you need a carrier that supports it, and line of sight to an
    > > >> equipped mast.

    >
    > > >> Given the costs for microwave, dishes et al it may be cheaper to get
    > > >> fibre
    > > >> installed anyway (depending on how far you are from a useable duct) - and
    > > >> the fibre will give you a way to get to 1 Gbps and higher.

    >
    > > >> > What about the copper vs fiber issue....
    > > >> > if we only have copper avail going into our facility.

    >
    > > >> if you can get fibre and it is reasonable cost, then do it.

    >
    > > >> > PS - any other newsgroups where this non-specific hardware vendor,
    > > >> > and more carrier oriented discussions might take place ?

    >
    > > >> you could always start one :)

    >
    > > >> > tnx -
    > > >> --
    > > >> Regards

    >
    > > >> - replace xyz with ntl- Hide quoted text -

    >
    > - Show quoted text -



    i worked in a situation like this once. we were building our MPLS
    network, and both large office locations we needed at least 6 megabits
    to the MPLS network. We could not get DS3's into either building w/o
    the carrier making us pay for the installation of the DS3 (long
    story). We were able to with AT&T to use MLPPP to bond 4 T1's
    together and connect to their MPLS cloud. At the time, November 2005
    they were only allowing certain companies to do this, but if you went
    to AT&T and pushed them, they will likely do the MPLS over MLPPP due
    to your extranous situation.
     
    MattG, Jun 8, 2007
    #7
  8. P.Schuman

    Scott Perry Guest

    > i worked in a situation like this once. we were building our MPLS
    > network, and both large office locations we needed at least 6 megabits
    > to the MPLS network. We could not get DS3's into either building w/o
    > the carrier making us pay for the installation of the DS3 (long
    > story). We were able to with AT&T to use MLPPP to bond 4 T1's
    > together and connect to their MPLS cloud. At the time, November 2005
    > they were only allowing certain companies to do this, but if you went
    > to AT&T and pushed them, they will likely do the MPLS over MLPPP due
    > to your extranous situation.
    >


    2 Channelized T1/PRI ports on a WIC

    interface Multilink1
    description *** Dual DS-1 (T1) to Telco ***
    ip address (your IP address) 255.255.255.252
    ip access-group multilink1_in in
    ip access-group multilink1_out out
    no cdp enable
    ppp multilink
    ppp multilink group 1
    !
    interface Serial0/0/0:0
    description *** (this is a great place to put your circuit ID) ***
    bandwidth 1544
    no ip address
    encapsulation ppp
    no fair-queue
    ppp multilink group 1
    !
    interface Serial0/0/1:0
    description *** (this is a great place to put your circuit ID) ***
    bandwidth 1544
    no ip address
    encapsulation ppp
    no fair-queue
    ppp multilink group 1
     
    Scott Perry, Jun 8, 2007
    #8
  9. P.Schuman

    stephen Guest

    "Scott Perry" <scottperry@aciscocompany> wrote in message
    news:4669b1ef$0$21251$...
    > i worked in a situation like this once. we were building our MPLS
    > network, and both large office locations we needed at least 6 megabits
    > to the MPLS network. We could not get DS3's into either building w/o
    > the carrier making us pay for the installation of the DS3 (long
    > story). We were able to with AT&T to use MLPPP to bond 4 T1's
    > together and connect to their MPLS cloud. At the time, November 2005
    > they were only allowing certain companies to do this, but if you went
    > to AT&T and pushed them, they will likely do the MPLS over MLPPP due
    > to your extranous situation.
    >


    2 Channelized T1/PRI ports on a WIC

    interface Multilink1
    description *** Dual DS-1 (T1) to Telco ***
    ip address (your IP address) 255.255.255.252
    ip access-group multilink1_in in
    ip access-group multilink1_out out
    no cdp enable
    ppp multilink
    ppp multilink group 1
    !
    interface Serial0/0/0:0
    description *** (this is a great place to put your circuit ID) ***
    bandwidth 1544
    no ip address
    encapsulation ppp
    no fair-queue
    ppp multilink group 1
    !
    interface Serial0/0/1:0
    description *** (this is a great place to put your circuit ID) ***
    bandwidth 1544
    no ip address
    encapsulation ppp
    no fair-queue
    ppp multilink group 1

    last time i checked a cisco 28xx or 38xx could take the AIM-IMA card - this
    supports IMA on up to 4 links - the bigger routers can take 2 AIMs, but not
    sure if 2 IMA cards is going to work.

    Or if you need 1 bigger block of circuits, then a 7200 can take an 8 port T1
    IMA card, and you can have multiple cards, although each card supports a
    different ATM interface.

    1 thing i mentioned that you skipped past - if you need lots of PVCs to
    different remote sites, then each PVC may not need to go over 1.5 Mbps.

    If so, just use separate T1s and spread the PVCs across them to balance the
    load.
    --
    Regards

    - replace xyz with ntl
     
    stephen, Jun 8, 2007
    #9
  10. P.Schuman

    Guest Guest

    For the Cisco the Card is the:
    NM-8T1-IMA
    8-port T1 ATM Network Module with IMA
    New should be no more than $3500. Used, less than that.

    They MSRP is about $5062

    The card will fit into a router chassis. If you ware needing both ends then
    you will need to purchase two cards, and two routers.



    "P.Schuman" <> wrote in message
    news:El1ai.12986$...
    > tnx - I'll take at look at the various router vendors for Inverse Muxing
    > cards...
    > what model is the Cisco IMA ?? and what model is the Nortel IMA ??
    >
    > BTW - this is our situation....
    >> We have a location where the 40 year old telco conduit is totally full of

    > twisted pair,
    >> and for a new fiber run,
    >> they need to cut across the street, some land, parking areas, etc
    >> to even get to the physical building entrance...

    >
    > <> wrote in message
    > news:gL0ai.7229$...
    >> We use partial DS3. Populate channels as required. Or for INET,
    >> upgrade
    >> spead as requried,
    >> Only good if you start out with at least 8 T1 for voice. SCB/AT&T uses
    >> the
    >> MX2800 on the CPE side for the Mux t1 used for Voice/Data.
    >> For Inet they just install a router with DS3. Then charge for bandwidth
    >> as
    >> ordered..
    >>
    >> Assuming your entrance has some coax available.
    >>
    >> If you are cocerned with only data muxing using T1's to transport for
    >> the
    >> purpose of establing higher spead internet then all the major mfr have
    >> IMA
    >> cards for their routers to inverse multiplex T1s. Cisco's IMA works
    >> well.
    >> Not sure about Nortel IMA cards. The previous statement of ATM cell
    >> overhead applies.
    >>
    >> Chris
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> "P.Schuman" <> wrote in message
    >> news:ii%9i.11483$...
    >> > tnx for the info -
    >> > I guess I'm looking at how to accomplish the N*T1 physically ?
    >> > We had previously used Sprint - and they offered muxing T1's
    >> > using the Datalink ? mux.
    >> >
    >> > BUT - that required the carrier to have one on their end,
    >> > and offer the service.
    >> >
    >> > SO - just checking to see what's around (in the US)
    >> > that is offered from the carrier,
    >> > and what hardware is required to performing the muxing function.
    >> >
    >> > We have a location where the 40 year old telco conduit is totally full,
    >> > and for a new fiber run,
    >> > they need to cut across the street, some land, parking areas, etc
    >> > to even get to the physical building entrance...
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > "stephen" <> wrote in message
    >> > news:pZ_9i.16040$...
    >> >> "P.Schuman" <> wrote in message
    >> >> news:DpZ9i.11456$...
    >> >> > what options are available from the carriers for the local loop
    >> >> > into either an old Frame or new MPLS network
    >> >> > when we need more than a single T1, but less than a DS-3
    >> >>
    >> >> If you have to get into a F/relay cloud then the best you can do is
    >> >> probably N * T1 - either treat them as a line group or just partition
    >> >> your
    >> >> PVCs down different pipes.
    >> >>
    >> >> An alternative that was popular in Europe was to use IMA to aggregate
    >> >> several E1s into a bigger logical ATM pipe - you lose maybe 15% to
    >> >> cell
    >> >> overheads, but the balancing happens per cell, so you get very good
    >> >> utilisation of all the pipes.
    >> >>
    >> >> MPLS is the way to go for more choices - uk fix for the same kind of
    >> >> in
    >> >> between speeds is 10 Mbps Ethernet as a tail (or SDH on a CPE mux at
    >> >> your
    >> >> site) - but you need fibre access for it.
    >> >>
    >> >> You can get higher speed than T1 on ADSL / SDSL, and maybe find a
    >> >> telco
    >> >> who
    >> >> allows bonding? Some of the systems (pairgain?) will bond multiple
    >> >> SDSL
    >> >> links and present it as Ethernet.
    >> >>
    >> >> Finally - work supports Ethernet over microwave as a tail at up to 100
    >> >> Mbps - but you need a carrier that supports it, and line of sight to
    >> >> an
    >> >> equipped mast.
    >> >>
    >> >> Given the costs for microwave, dishes et al it may be cheaper to get
    >> >> fibre
    >> >> installed anyway (depending on how far you are from a useable duct) -
    >> >> and
    >> >> the fibre will give you a way to get to 1 Gbps and higher.
    >> >> >
    >> >> > What about the copper vs fiber issue....
    >> >> > if we only have copper avail going into our facility.
    >> >>
    >> >> if you can get fibre and it is reasonable cost, then do it.
    >> >> >
    >> >> > PS - any other newsgroups where this non-specific hardware vendor,
    >> >> > and more carrier oriented discussions might take place ?
    >> >>
    >> >> you could always start one :)
    >> >> >
    >> >> > tnx -
    >> >> --
    >> >> Regards
    >> >>
    >> >> - replace xyz with ntl
    >> >>
    >> >>
    >> >
    >> >

    >>
    >>

    >
    >
     
    Guest, Jun 9, 2007
    #10
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. sumanta

    MPEG2 PS stream Muxing

    sumanta, Sep 28, 2005, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,081
    sumanta
    Sep 28, 2005
  2. P.Schuman

    muxing T1's vs DS-3

    P.Schuman, Jun 7, 2007, in forum: VOIP
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    598
    Guest
    Jun 9, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page