<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Re: funny in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r16262698</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Sat, 28 Nov 2009 18:20:29 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Nov 2009 18:20:29 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: funny</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16264728</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/0"><b>anon</b></A> : Someone understands the difference between backbone capacity and last mile access:)]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16264728</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jun 2006 19:14:02 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: funny</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16264329</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/179953"><b>elbm</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><SMALL>said by  deepblackmag <A HREF="/useremail/u/1130617"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</SMALL><BR><BR>Thats not true. New DWDM allows up to around 120gbps. Check out the SAFE pipeline. In a few years africas new ipv6 infastructure will make us look like the redneck retards we have running the country.<br> </DIV>DWDM runs multiple "sonet" pipes on a single fiber. IE-- your example of 120 gbps would actually be 12 separate wavelengths each running 10 gbps or oc192 not a single wavelength at 120 gbps. (320-400 gbps second DWDM machines are not that uncommon-- 32-40 oc192's) So in single "beam" of light oc768 is as fast as you will see deployed-- however DWDM tech could allow someone to run multiple oc768 on a single fiber for even faster DWDM.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16264329</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jun 2006 16:39:14 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: funny</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16264065</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/692322"><b>insomniac</b></A> : Big difference between upgrading a backbone and running fiber to my front door, like they ought to be.<br><SMALL>--<br>If everything seems to be going well, you've obviously overlooked something.</SMALL>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16264065</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jun 2006 16:04:12 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: funny</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16263936</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/917340"><b>Geminimind</b></A> : That is good but what about the people who still can't get dsl?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16263936</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jun 2006 15:47:22 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: funny</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16263751</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1294605"><b>Fatal Vector</b></A> : <br>What's funny is us worrying about africas infrastructure. As if they will be needing any such thing any time soon. Get real.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16263751</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jun 2006 15:18:59 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: funny</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16263184</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1307168"><b>dublin00</b></A> : I guess I should have said manufacturable.  I started working on OC-768 switches in 2000.  It has taken 5-6 years for it to get to the point that you could sell a switch with the technology (i.e not a one off prototype).  I suspect it will take just as long for OC-1536 or what-ever they call it to reach a mass producible state too.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16263184</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jun 2006 13:50:29 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: funny</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16263089</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1130617"><b>deepblackmag</b></A> : Thats not true. New DWDM allows up to around 120gbps. Check out the SAFE pipeline. In a few years africas new ipv6 infastructure will make us look like the redneck retards we have running the country.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16263089</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jun 2006 13:35:12 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: funny</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16262913</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1307168"><b>dublin00</b></A> : OC-768 is the top end of current technology right now, but on the other hand a typical MPLS switch might have hundreds of OC-768 ports (usually 4 per line card), so that is a alot of available bandwidth.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16262913</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jun 2006 13:07:44 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: funny</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16262813</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/244791"><b>Gilitar</b></A> : I was thinking the same. 40 Gbps could be used up real quick with a bunch of HD channels.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16262813</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jun 2006 12:51:58 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: funny</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16262698</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1333462"><b>shoan</b></A> : AT&T has been laying a good bit of fiber in our area but still no idea if they are going ot do something about the RT's so we can even get DSL time will tell.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16262698</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jun 2006 12:36:09 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: funny</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16262607</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/0"><b>anon</b></A> : 40 Gbps is not enough.  If they're spending this kind of money anyway, they should invest in upgrading further.  Bandwidth usage is going to skyrocket in the next few years.  Spending a little more now would be smarter.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16262607</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jun 2006 12:34:15 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: funny</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16262642</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/594412"><b>TKJunkMail</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><SMALL>said by  footballdude <A HREF="/useremail/u/672830"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</SMALL><br><br>Funny to see this story immediately after the last one where telcos are getting bashed for not upgrading their networks.<br> </DIV>And now getting bashed here again for upgrading. If your name is AT&T you can't please some people no matter what you do.<br><SMALL>--<br>--<BR><A HREF="http://tinyurl.com/8n9wl">Join Red Room Forum</A><BR><A HREF="http://tkjunkmail.blogspot.com">BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com</A><BR><A HREF="http://tkjunkmail.googlepages.com">My Web Page</A></SMALL>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16262642</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jun 2006 12:28:45 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>funny</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16262588</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/672830"><b>footballdude</b></A> : Funny to see this story immediately after the last one where telcos are getting bashed for not upgrading their networks.<br><SMALL>--<br>If Darwin was right and evolution really works, why are there so many stupid people out there?</SMALL>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16262588</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jun 2006 12:20:21 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
