muxing T1's vs DS-3

muxing T1's vs DS-3
NewsGroups | Search | Tools
User Password
Register Now! Lost Password?
 comp.dcom.sys.nortel  Post an article  get this group's latest topics as an RSS feed add this group's latest topics to your My MSN content add this group's latest topics to your My Yahoo content  add this group's latest topics to your Google content  YahooMyWeb Yahoo!  Google Google  Windows Live Favorites Windows Live  del.icio.us del.icio.us  digg digg  Add to Netscape Netscape
Subject Author Date
muxing T1's vs DS-3 P.Schuman 06-07-2007
Posted by P.Schuman on June 7, 2007, 3:56 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
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 -



NMFall 20%
Posted by stephen on June 7, 2007, 5:43 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
> 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

stephen_hope@xyzworld.com - replace xyz with ntl



Posted by P.Schuman on June 7, 2007, 6:04 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
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...


> > 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
>
> stephen_hope@xyzworld.com - replace xyz with ntl
>
>



Posted by John Agosta on June 7, 2007, 7:42 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Call Charles Industries in Rolling Meadows, Illinois.
They offer a DS3 mux....

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

-ja





> 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...
>
>
>> > 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
>>
>> stephen_hope@xyzworld.com - replace xyz with ntl
>>
>>
>
>



Posted by on June 7, 2007, 7:44 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
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



> 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...
>
>
>> > 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
>>
>> stephen_hope@xyzworld.com - replace xyz with ntl
>>
>>
>
>



Similar ThreadsPosted
muxing T1's for higher speed June 6, 2007, 6:55 pm

other useful resources:
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
Telecommunications Industry Association
Electronic and Software Security Products and Services
International Telecommunication Union

Custom CGI Perl and PHP programming by 1-Script.com

Contact Us | Privacy Policy
The site map in XML format XML site map