Part Iii - What Are the Pros & Cons of T1, Ds3, Oc3, and Ethernet Bandwidth Solutions For Voice-Data

This is the 3rd and final part of a 3 part series that will hopefully help guide you to manufacture great decisions on bandwidth solutions (T1, Ds3, Oc3, And Ethernet) for your voice and/or computer data network. Read intimately and soak up every tidbit from all three parts of this series (see previous articles for Part I and Ii). Hopefully, after reading all 3 parts in the series you'll be great armed to make the right decisions for your business network infrastructure.

The previous 2 parts in this series layed the groundwork for the suggested resolution of the examine .... To follow below. The focus should not necessarily be on the pros and cons of each type of bandwidth circuit .... But rather on the needs of your network and the best fit for a high operation network infrastructure. Whether that network infrastructure's customary function be for voice, computer data, or both.

High Bandwidth

Now .... When you speak about T1 versus Ds3 verus Oc3 you are speaking about primarily corporeal layer protocols. These protocols define the size of the data pipe, the type of connectors used, etc.

What I think you need to be more implicated with is which Layer 2 protocol to run. I myself favor Mpls as it is rapidly becoming the de facto suitable for most carriers in their own backbone networks. And most of the larger carriers (i.e., At&T, Global Crossing, Sprint, etc.) have 'productized' Mpls and made it available to their customers. The advantage to Mpls is it can run on any and/or all of the aforementioned layer 1 platforms.

In addition, Mpls afford you the potential to prioritize your network traffic. The most immediate impact is the potential to successfully collapse voice traffic onto your data network, effectively getting 2 networks for the price of 1 straight through the use of VoIp. Mpls allows you to set a higher priority "tag" to ensure VoIp gets routed in a time effective manner by the carrier(s). If you want to see a large scale deployment of this, look at any of the major carrier's own internal Ld backhaul network. At&T and Global Crossing have both been using VoIp/Mpls Ld backhauls internally for years now.

I believe a properly designed network infrastructure can be cost justified to all but the very smallest businesses. And even that line is beginning to blur as some Dsl carriers are offering Mpls over Dsl now.

So in overview .... Focus less on the type of bandwidth for the network and more on the compose of the actual infrastructure (sic Layer 2). Than match the bandwidth circuit (sic Layer 1) which best supports that infrastructure design. Of policy .... Functionality and reliability are factors ... But also availability, capacity, and cost. The latter 3 being the true main differences in the middle of T1, Ds3, Oc3, and ethernet.

As stated above ..... When push comes to shove ..... You should find that Mpls will deliver the best scenario for your network infrastructure now and for a long time to come. Next .... Decree what bandwidth circuit best ensures your Mpls will funtion as you designed and require.

If you need aid (Free) looking the best fit Mpls explication for your network (voice, data, or both)... I advise you use the no cost services available from FreedomFire Communications.

Part Iii - What Are the Pros & Cons of T1, Ds3, Oc3, and Ethernet Bandwidth Solutions For Voice-Data

Fast Ethernet - The Next Step In High Speed Lan Services

Most enterprises today use Ethernet based Lan solutions. Invariably all of them have the newest fast Ethernet solutions in their Lans. While this is a norm today, it was not that uncomplicated all way. The Lan technologies have come a long way from the earliest uncomplicated implementations to the contemporary day high speed solutions.

The first Lan implementations were based on the same Ethernet belief but used a coaxial cable instead. The main backbone was a high grade coaxial cable which was thick adequate to enlarge adequate to connect a handful of computers and allow them to communicate. Since the focus was more on connectivity than the speeds, the traditional Lan speeds were nearby 2 Mbps to 5 Mbps.

High Bandwidth

This transformed fully when coaxial cables were substituted by unshielded twisted pairs or the Utp cables. These were more flexible along the corners which was a big relief from the coaxial cables which did not bend well at the sharp corners. This verily changed the manner in which Lan networks were built and connected.

To complement the Utp cable the Ethernet Lan was now implemented with new devices called hubs. The hubs are similar to the coaxial cables where there is a bus and all ports on the devices are basically drops from this bus. The advantage of hub though was that the computers could be linked at a longer length from the bus. There was no need to run the bus or coaxial cable throughout the rooms. It could be in a central location and all computers linked to it.

Both these evolutions came about straight through a new acceptable termed as the 10 Base T. This was a new flavour of the already beloved Ethernet. This one extended the Lan to longer length and also increased the speeds to 10 Mbps. eventually with the growing popularity of hubs, new devices called switches came into the market. These allowed the typically half duplex Lan networks to become full duplex, doubling the capacity.

With all the Lan evolutions there was new breed of bandwidth applications and more computers started getting added into the network. Now there was need for a boost in bandwidth. This is where Fast Ethernet got standardized.

Today many enterprises have exclusively Fast Ethernet networks. The switches too evolved to maintain fast Ethernet ports bringing in the benefits of high speed with full duplex operations. This has truly changed the enterprise Lan landscape.

Fast Ethernet - The Next Step In High Speed Lan Services