Switching Grows Up: Winners and Losers and The Next Cisco?

ATM has a lot in common with token ring. Both are connection-oriented, offer superior technology and are getting clobbered by the brute force of Ethernet. But we aren't likely to see gigabit token-ring switches comprising enterprise backbones.

For one thing, ATM and token-passing FDDI have complemented token-ring LANs nicely, reducing the need to develop High-Speed Token Ring technology. Also, token ring isn't a contention technology like Ethernet, so there are no collisions that can be eliminated by switching to the desktop. Consequently, token-ring switches have been used largely to aggregate hubs. However, switched-port prices ($250 to $275) are now getting close enough to shared-port prices ($200) that switching to the desktop is practical.

"Switches are the one token-ring investment that continues to make sense," says Michelle McLean, senior analyst for META Group, Inc. in Burlingame, Calif.

There are no Layer 3 token-ring switches to date, partly because the existing switches function rather like Layer 2.5 devices. Token ring's source-route bridging avoids spanning tree problems by allowing for parallel paths in a Layer 2 network. As a result, there is less need for routing - whether traditional or via Layer 3 switches - in token-ring LANs.

HSTRA Web site

"We also don't have as much of a reversal of the 80/20 rule on token-ring networks," says David Olechovsky, chairman of the High-Speed Token Ring Alliance (HSTRA) and token-ring product-line manager at IBM in Research Triangle Park, N.C.

Still reeling from the blow of Cisco's desertion, HSTRA members are regrouping this week at Interop with demonstrations of the first 4/16/100M bit/sec token-ring network interface cards (NIC). At press time, IBM was also planning to show off the first 100M bit/sec token-ring switch.

Routing vs. bridging: an inverse relationship
3Com contends the introduction of each new generation of technology brings a swing in the amount of routing and bridging technology users employ. For example, after multiprotocol routers came on the scene around 1988, companies relied on routing roughly 80% of the time and bridging only 20%, but the roles reversed following the onset of the Layer 2 switch.

---

The next Cisco?

The move from traditional routers to routing switches is the kind of technological upheaval that creates opportunities for newcomers and threatens the established players. A lot of the best technology is coming from start-ups that hope the move to switching is a big enough paradigm shift to establish a new order.

However, analysts are unanimous on this one: Not a chance. The move from shared to switched Ethernet didn't produce any new leaders, and the current generation of start-ups is fated to get acquired - possibly by telcos.

But the start-ups, as always, are responsible for much of the innovation.

"The big guys are tied to their installed bases and existing products," says Foundry's Demopoulos. "We will always be nine to 12 months ahead of them. There are companies out there that have mission-critical networks and can't wait for the big guys. Those people are our customers."

Foundry product overview

Incyte Pharmaceuticals, Inc. in Palo Alto, Calif., is a case in point. In 1997, the company's Ethernet network was choking under the load created by genomics processing and other compute-intensive scientific applications. Meeting 1998 business goals was expected to triple the traffic to an average of 800 gigabits per day.

"We were a big Bay shop before, but they couldn't meet our needs at the time," says Philip Kwan, manager of network operations and planning for Incyte. Instead, the company upgraded its backbone with Foundry gigabit switches that provide a multi-building facility with access to supercomputers and big server farms.

To Part 4: Over the horizon and Eliminating Layer 2?

Intro and What's in a Name | Prospects for ATM and Wrong Assumptions
The entire report in a single file