Sonnet versus ATM backbone

Discussion in 'Trading Software' started by FuturesTrader71, May 9, 2005.

  1. Hi folks,

    Due to some issues with my private T-1 provider between DC and Chicago, there has been much higher latency on my line than discussed during the purchasing phase. One of the options I have is to switch from an ATM based network to a Sonnet based network. I have tried to research online about the difference between them, but it is not very clear.

    I am hoping that someone who knows would tell me or point me to a site that has a comparison.

    My questions are:

    1. What would this do to the latency of the packets to the clearer?

    2. What disadvantage is there with Sonnet (I'm on ATM now) as far as trading?

    3. Do you think this will positively effect latency in any way (lower latency) or is this just a way from them to say they did "something"?

    Any insight would be a huge help. Thanks.
  2. nitro


    Sonnet networks I believe are of a higher quality than ATM.

    What you want is dark fibre from you to your broker.

  3. Thanks Nitro. It appears that all fiber available to this Tier 1 provider between here and Chicago is at capacity. I'm on a waiting list for the next fiber that comes along. They are aware that they are in the wrong by promising the latency and then not delivering, so I'm enjoying a free T-1 for now (at what cost???).

    The other suggest was Sonnet. He said that it will make a slight difference to the better, but I wanted to verify from another source.

    I'm shopping for a new Tier 1 in the process. I have withheld all payments including installation so far, so they have an incentive to get me a solution.

  4. gwb-trading


    SONET vs. ATM

    There are some fundamental differences between SONET and ATM. SONET is more a physical layer transport definition with some Layer 2 attributes (overhead etc.). The SONET lines rates usually are from OC-3 (155Mb) to OC-48 (2.4Gb). T1 links can be "packaged" into SONET "payload" for transport over the Fiber without much disruption of the original data.

    In this situation, ATM is more closely aligned with a layer 2 application. Everything is re-packaged into 53 byte cells and transported using the ATM protocol. This means there is normally significant assembly and re-assembly of your information with ATM. Note that ATM cells can be carried over many different types of physical links (T1, Frame Relay, even SONET). The inability of your carrier to meet your service level agreement for delay may be due in some part to the selection of ATM as a transport mechanism even though some other factors can come into play.

    In your situation, having your carrier simply use SONET to transport your T1 between the two cities will more likely allow them to meet the "terms of service" of your contract. However unless I had a complete overview of their network architecture then I could not answer in definitive terms.

    - Greg
  5. The main issue right now is that instead of being on the fiber pipe that goes from DC directly to Broadview, IL (Broadview is the point right behind the CBOT in Chicago where my office is), they have me routed from DC to Atlanta through Nashville, St Louis, Indianapolis to Chicago. Currently, my cable internet has almost the same ping as my T-1. Very frustrating. I have adapted to it, but it cost a lot to have to go for the next price when you scalp in and out all day. I'm having them switch to SONET right away. I don't have much to lose at this point.

    Thanks for your input.