Talk:Dynamic synchronous transfer mode

Early comment

The basic argument for this technique is that it provides a guaranteed QoS for a service since resources are physically allocated to the channel and traffic from other channels will have no impact on this channel.

In TDM the channel is divided up into sub-channels. Are the bold channels above sub-channels or the primary DTM channel?

209.162.11.201 02:31, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

There is only one level of channels in DTM. However there are discussions about introducing a mapping of DTM channels inside a DTM channel ("DTM-in-DTM"). This would have several interesting applications, such as providing VPN like DTM tunnels, off-loading intermediate nodes from signalling etc.

Your use of the term "channel" is a bit missleading in this context. A DTM link has a certain capacity, a number of slots. On this one or more DTM channels can be formed of any multiple of slots, as long as there is slots available on that link. Cfmd (talk) 20:55, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

B-ISDN reborn

I've been through all this before, and I don't hold out any great hopes for it outside of closed systems; it's swimming against the tide that has already washed away ATM.

As far as I can tell, this is effectively an implementation of CBR "jumbo phone calls" in the spirit of B-ISDN, with 64 bits per timeslot instead of 8, and is effectively an admission of defeat with regard to ATM. (Mind you, it's more likely to be possible to implement correctly.)

Questions:

• What's the call setup protocol?
  • DCP (DTM Control Protocol)
• What's the call routing protocol?
  • DRP (DTM Routing Protocol)
• What do the call setup and routing protocols run over (for example, are there dedicated signalling timeslots on each path, as in the PDH?)
  • Yes the first timeslot on each link is used for signalling
• I wonder how long this will take to be deployed encapsulated as DTMoIP?
  • It was introduced in 2009 and is now widely deployed...

-- 87.74.42.114 17:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Added answers inline to the questions above. Vigaglum (talk) 06:55, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Historical?

Besides needing verifiable citations, this needs context. It looks like the article was created circa 2005. So in the six years since, has anyone implemented it? W Nowicki (talk) 22:42, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

It is being implemented and commercially used. The article lacks many relevant quotes, as the reminder of the ETSI series of standards. The deployment is there. The lack of update does however not very well reflect its usage. Cfmd (talk) 20:49, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dynamic synchronous transfer mode. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111009134052/http://broadcastpapers.com/whitepapers/IBCNetInsightMediaExtranet.pdf to http://broadcastpapers.com/whitepapers/IBCNetInsightMediaExtranet.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:19, 15 September 2017 (UTC)