4 ms·
Token Ring Networking as a protocol/concept (not so much physical IBM hardware, of course) rather than CSMA/CD. It naturally makes sense that allocating BW via
by VLM 9y ago
Token Ring Networking as a protocol/concept (not so much physical IBM hardware, of course) rather than CSMA/CD.
It naturally makes sense that allocating BW via a token would be much more power efficient and faster than transmitting into the void and hoping for no collision. Its hard to get line rate traffic with CSMA/CD but the financial services co I was working at back then had very high util in the upper 90%s for hours.
I also miss ATM and its complicated and semi-obscure adaptation layers, pretty cool although toward its death it was just a weird way to send pt-to-pt ethernet frames. ISDN was like that too, a whole protocol stack, pretty interesting exciting ideas, toward the end it was just a 128K pt-pt interface for internet access and of course a voice trunk signalling protocol replacing old E+M signalling. Both could have been interesting/cool. X.25 switching never really took off either.
- sah2ed 9y agoI did a cursory search [0] on Token Ring vs CSMA/CD and it appears that "worse is better" is why CSMA/CD won out. CSMA/CD was much cheaper to deploy than Token Ring. "Token-Ring has been a bit of a mystery for many people. This is due to the fact that Ethernet, and other Carrier Sense Multi Access - Collision Detection (CSMA/CD) networks, are the most widely installed network topology. This is because most network designers cannot look past the initial cost of Token-Ring. While Token-Ring does cost more per port to install, it offers vast benefits over Ethernet and other CSMA/CD topologies." [0] http://www.let.rug.nl/bosveld/algoritmiek/aptokenhc7.htm http://www.let.rug.nl/bosveld/algoritmiek/aptokenhc7.htm