Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bu-cs!kwe
From: kwe@bu-cs.BU.EDU (kwe@bu-it.bu.edu (Kent W. England))
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: IEEE 802.3 LAN Considerations vs. 802.5 Token Ring
Message-ID: <20442@bu-cs.BU.EDU>
Date: 7 Mar 88 18:41:55 GMT
References: <8802280650.AA08271@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> <1144@athos.rutgers.edu>
Reply-To: kwe@buit13.bu.edu (Kent England)
Followup-To: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Organization: Boston Univ. Information Tech. Dept.
Lines: 18
Summary: Token Ring priority allocation also useful


	Hedrick, as always, makes a clear and concise exposition of
Ethernet versus Token Ring.  I think most users don't have a choice
with network technology, you take what your vendor gives you.  802.5
for Big Blue, 802.3 for DEC and Un*x.
	I see great usefulness for Token Ring bandwidth allocation
schemes, such as proposed in the IEEE MAN work, for allocating
bandwidth and minimizing packet delays for voice traffic versus data.
I'm not really looking to integrate voice/data on the campus, but it
will be indispensible in the MAN standard.  Coupled with the need for
high bandwidth and the preference for fiber (what ever happened to the
promises of the CATV evangelists?), Token Ring (not 802.5) is a clear
technology winner.  This means that TR will trickle down to eventually
supplant Ethernet, although there is no technical reason to do so
until 50Mbps link speeds are required for workstations.  (Can't wait!)

	Kent England
	Boston University