Am I the only one remembering ATM? Not cash machines, but Asynchronous Transfer Mode. A physical level protocol designed for an end-to-end maximum latency of 300 ms. Globally. The first version of the standard, 35 years ago, specified 155 Mbps and 620 Mbps user interfaces; 2.4 Gbps and 10 Gbps was for internal network switches. Like a telephone connection, an ATM connection was routed end-to-end at the physical level. The physical level also handled statistical multiplexing for virtual connections. I have heard (no URL available) that there were IP routing networks using virtual ATM connections for single-hop routing between any two routers connected to the ATM network, significantly reducing latency and processing overhead. But ATM fell as a victim to the Network Wars. I never saw any good technical reasons why ATM should fail - but a lot of network-political reasons. I really wouldn't object to an ATM revival ... (Alternately: If someone would provide really good technical arguments why ATM deserved to fail, I'd like to learn about it. But I strongly doubt that there are many people around today that know ATM well enough to really give it a critical assessment, and certainly not without being colored by the Network Wars.)
