1 / 7

Case Study of IMTN Network B with A

Case Study of IMTN Network B with A. ET-IMTN 2001 ( Geneva, June 20 to 23, 2001). By Hiroyuki Ichijo Office of International Communications ,JMA. Jeddah. New Delhi. Moscow. Bracknell. Prague. Beijing. Tokyo. Washington. Sofia. Offenbach. Cairo. Toulouse. Nairobi. Buenos Aires.

tehya
Download Presentation

Case Study of IMTN Network B with A

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Case Study of IMTN Network B with A ET-IMTN 2001 ( Geneva, June 20 to 23, 2001) By Hiroyuki Ichijo Office of International Communications ,JMA

  2. Jeddah New Delhi Moscow Bracknell Prague Beijing Tokyo Washington Sofia Offenbach Cairo Toulouse Nairobi Buenos Aires Brasilia Melbourne Dakar Algiers Network-to-Network Interconnection (NNI) Network C Network A Network B Network D RA VI RMDCN MTN PVC through Network Inter-Regional PVC through Network Gateway RTH RTH- MTN Existing network 1. Seeking a possible and practical implementation Configuration by ET-IMTN

  3. FRAME RELAY SCHEMATIC (INFONET by Telstra) Dorval, Canada 128K Washington NWS USA 256K Tokyo, Japan 16K 256K <-16K/8k-> 32K NESDIS 128K 32K 256K 64K Bracknell UK <-16K/8k-> 8K 16K <-16K/8k-> 8K 64K 16K Pretoria, South Africa 8K 64K Brasilia Brazil 64K 128K Buenos Aires Argentina a plan by Telstra [ Consolidate Network A with B ] Melbourne Australia

  4. a plan by KDDI [ Consolidate IMTN with Region II Links ] Dorval Washington NWS /NESDIS Hong Kong HKT Frame Relay Pretoria NNI Gateway Buenos Aires FR Port U.S.A. FR Port Japan Brasilia KDDI Frame Relay INFONET Frame Relay Local Line Tokyo Gateway FR Port Australia FR Port U.K. Melbourne NNI Gateway NNI Gateway CAT Frame Relay DACOM Frame Relay Bracknell Bangkok IMTN Network B with Network A and additional links Seoul

  5. Tokyo Washington Bracknell Washington Tokyo Melbourne One of major Service providers 　 “Some Clouds” ”a Single Cloud” One Cloud Bracknell Melbourne NNI KDDI MCI WorldCom BT Telestra Which is practical,“a Single Cloud” or “Some Clouds” ? Even “a Single Cloud” , it is possible that a true seamless network would not be always available…. But IMTN project makes progress towards “a Single Cloud” unless the implementation target would be in distant future. At least, the target of Network B should be implementation in 2002.

  6. Centre A Centre A Centre A Router Router (FRAD) VPN /Router Carrier’s Closed IP Network Frame Relay Network (ATM backbone) Internet Router Router (FRAD) VPN /Router Router Router (FRAD) VPN /Router Centre B Centre B Centre B Centre C Centre C Centre C IP-VPN service Frame Relay service Internet VPN service Cost Security Throughput guarantee Frame Relay and IP-VPN may be allowable. What kinds of services are allowable for the IMTN ?

  7. How will we deal with existing frameworks; Should we consolidate them into IMTN or not? That is a question! IMTN Brasilia INMET Buenos Aires Meteo AR Difficulties in collaborative arrangements Washington NOAA /NESDIS WorldCom Dedicated lines Pretoria SAWB Tokyo JMA RA V RMTN Dorval CMC WorldCom Frame Relay Melbourne BoM Bracknell UK met office BT Frame Relay

More Related