Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!math.fu-berlin.de!fauern!faui43.informatik.uni-erlangen.de!eckert From: eckert@immd4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Toerless Eckert) Subject: Re: Frame Relay? Message-ID: <1991Jun7.161935.11735@informatik.uni-erlangen.de> Organization: CSD., University of Erlangen, Germany References: <35723@boulder.Colorado.EDU> Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1991 16:19:35 GMT Lines: 34 From article <35724@boulder.Colorado.EDU>, by forster@cisco.com (Jim Forster): > >>> This all depends heavily on how much frame relay costs. So this benefit, >>> plus the use of a single outbound interface to interconnect multiple routers >>> (as suggested by Beach) are the major pluses. > > Greg, Linda, and others, > [...] > The advantages that I seen in FR are that it allows completely flexible > addresses, because it does level-2 switching. The other advantage (or disadvantage) is that the frame relay network will most probably be run by a commercial provider for the whole frame relay net, whereas in the case of leased lines you'll have to control all active parts in your net. So it's mostly a different way of splitting the administrative responsibilities. It is not very different from an X.25 net in this respect - you can build up you're own X.25 net by only leased lines, but you really don't want to, you'll only use a PDN if you can't afford the leased lines, or the traffic characteristic does not make leased lines necessary - I think this will compare very well with frame relay, because if you build up your own frame relay net, it will be more expensive due to the frame relay switches that you have to buy (or cisco implements frame relay switching - how about it ?) P.S.: (X.25 has useless overhead for the LAN interconnect purpose, that's why they invented frame relay) --- Toerless.Eckert@informatik.uni-erlangen.de /C=de/A=dbp/P=uni-erlangen/OU=informatik/S=Eckert/G=Toerless bandwidth - the final frontier.