Yes, I know - the PM-3 uses a 9711 STAC-LZS (Hi-Fn) chip for example.
The PM-3 may well be able to do it. Note that I said we intend to test
things to see what they can do, not that we decided not to.
>> It would raise the HW costs significantly to give it the kind of horsepower
Note here I'm addressing OR - since the percentage change is much more
noticable considering the price difference between and OR and an PM-3...
Of course, the OR doesn't need nearly the horsepower. The 386 in the
OR-ISDN is quite capable of doing STAC on ISDN, that was anticipated.
Since the OR-SYNC units are envisioned as stub routers, the need for full
bore compression is not seen there. A stronger case can be made for the
PM-3, and any future routing products used at a hub location or for the
main feeds. Like any IRX replacement product, etc.
>This "widely accepted" translates to this: "It has yet to be engineered
>correctly". Let me make a prediction: Livingston will migrate to a
>multi-processor architecture over time.
The PM-3 is already multiprocessor - HDLC controllers handle the I/O,
DSPs do the grunt PPP work, a STAC chip does compression, etc.
-MZ
-- Livingston Enterprises - Chair, Department of Interstitial Affairs Phone: 800-458-9966 510-737-2100 FAX: 510-737-2110 megazone@livingston.com For support requests: support@livingston.com <http://www.livingston.com/> Snail mail: 4464 Willow Road, Pleasanton, CA 94588