argh was Re: FDDI

From: Dan Linder <dlinder_at_uiuc.edu>
Date: Thu Jul 26 11:51:17 2001

On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Dave McGuire wrote:

> I apologize if my last remark (regarding FDDI, Ford Festivas, and
> using the right tool for the job) sounded snotty. I'm just trying to
> stand up for my principles, that combined with the fact that I'm in a

I agree; Ethernet is all well and good (cheap, etc) - but I doubt that too
many people would call it "elegant". Now FDDI (and other token-based
protocols) - I would call elegant. Especially when you want to do any
kind of worst-case analysis for real time or other sensitive applications.

The ethernet story is amusing. Here's a protocol (based on ALOHA, which
actually makes sense) that was initially bus-based that has since become
more-or-less point-to-point, at MUCH higher speeds, and yet the underlying
principles have never changed. So the whole point of ethernet has
basically been nill'ed out by going to entirely switched networks.

There comes a point to say "okay, time for something NEW".

Again, not that ethernet isn't great - it works all over the place. But
MAN - I am jealous of your 30-node FDDI network. Sweet.

   - Dan


Dan Linder / dlinder _at_ uiuc.edu
Graduate Student, College of Engineering, Dept. of Computer Science
   - Dept. of Computer Science Teaching Assistant
   - DoRES Computer Accessibility Researcher
Received on Thu Jul 26 2001 - 11:51:17 BST