
SMDS, or Switched Multimegabit Data Service, was a high-speed, connectionless, packet-switched WAN and metropolitan-area service offered by some carriers in the 1990s. It was intended to give enterprises a public-network way to interconnect LANs at multimegabit speeds without buying a full mesh of private leased lines. In an era when 10 Mbps Ethernet was common and wide-area links were expensive, that was a serious promise.
The original article described Telecom Italia's use of AT&T BNS 2000 Broadband Switches to build C-LAN, a nationwide broadband service network for business customers. C-LAN used Frame Relay and SMDS connectivity to support banking, manufacturing, transportation, research, and enterprise data applications, while offering a migration path toward ATM services.
What SMDS Offered
SMDS tried to make a carrier data service feel more like a LAN. RFC 1209 describes SMDS as a connectionless public packet-switched service with datagram transfer, high throughput, low delay, large user-information fields, individual and group-addressed packets, and service-provider screening features that could create closed user groups.
That combination was attractive because customers could connect multiple sites into a logical private network across a public carrier infrastructure. Instead of ordering a dedicated private line between every pair of offices, an enterprise could attach sites to the SMDS cloud and let the provider switch packets among them according to addressing and access rules.
Technical Shape
SMDS was based on cell relay technology and Bellcore technical advisories derived from IEEE 802.6 Distributed Queue Dual Bus (DQDB). Cisco documentation from the era describes SMDS access through DS-1 or DS-3 facilities and an SMDS CSU/DSU, with support for protocols such as IP and IPX. IP over SMDS used LLC/SNAP encapsulation and ARP mapping between IP addresses and SMDS addresses.
Important SMDS ideas included:
- Connectionless packet service: packets were handled independently rather than sent over a pre-established virtual circuit.
- LAN-like addressing: individual and group addressing made SMDS feel more like a shared data service than a point-to-point circuit.
- Closed user groups: provider-side screening helped customers build logical private networks.
- High-speed access: DS-1 and DS-3 access speeds were meaningful options for enterprise WANs of the time.
- Protocol transport: IP, IPX, X.25 interworking, and LAN interconnect use cases were important in mixed enterprise environments.
The Telecom Italia C-LAN Context
Telecom Italia's C-LAN was positioned as a way for businesses to link multiple corporate networks over a public service and operate them as a seamless virtual private network. The AT&T BNS 2000 switches supported Frame Relay and SMDS, with management through the StarKeeper II Network Management System for fault, performance, configuration, security, and billing functions.
The announcement also reflected the market mood in 1995. European telecommunications liberalization was approaching, enterprises wanted "LAN-like" public WAN services, and carriers needed platforms that could carry existing protocols while moving customers toward newer broadband packet services. Frame Relay and SMDS were part of that migration story, while ATM was presented as the next step.
SMDS Versus Frame Relay And ATM
SMDS, Frame Relay, and ATM overlapped but had different models:
- SMDS: connectionless, datagram-oriented, and designed to resemble a high-speed public LAN or MAN service.
- Frame Relay: connection-oriented through virtual circuits, widely adopted for enterprise WANs because it was economical and operationally simple compared with leased-line meshes.
- ATM: cell-based, service-class-oriented, and intended to support voice, video, and data with quality-of-service mechanisms.
Frame Relay won more enterprise WAN mindshare because virtual circuits matched carrier operations and customer designs well. ATM became important in carrier cores, DSL aggregation, and some enterprise backbones. SMDS remained more of a transitional and regional service, remembered by network engineers but rarely seen after Ethernet, MPLS, and IP services matured.
Why SMDS Disappeared
SMDS did not fail because the problem was unimportant. It disappeared because other technologies solved the problem with better economics, broader vendor support, and cleaner operational models. Switched Ethernet became the enterprise LAN standard. Carrier Ethernet gave service providers a familiar Ethernet handoff for metro and wide-area services. MPLS VPNs gave enterprises scalable any-to-any private IP reachability. Internet VPNs and later SD-WAN made public broadband usable for many business paths.
The result is that SMDS became unnecessary. Enterprises could get higher speeds, simpler equipment, better tooling, and broader provider availability from Ethernet, MPLS, and IP-based services. Carrier networks also standardized around packet, label-switched, and optical transport platforms that did not require customers to understand SMDS-specific addressing or access behavior.
Modern Equivalents
The role SMDS once aimed to fill is now split among several services:
- MPLS Layer 3 VPN: private routed connectivity across many enterprise sites.
- Carrier Ethernet: Ethernet private line, Ethernet virtual private line, and multipoint Ethernet services for metro and wide-area connectivity.
- EVPN: modern Ethernet VPN control plane for data centers, service providers, and some enterprise fabrics.
- SD-WAN: overlay networking across MPLS, broadband, DIA, LTE, 5G, and cloud links.
- Direct cloud interconnect: private or dedicated connectivity into hyperscale cloud regions and SaaS ecosystems.
- Internet VPN: encrypted site-to-site or user-to-site connectivity when cost and reach matter more than private underlay guarantees.
Design Lessons
SMDS is historically useful because it shows what enterprises wanted before the modern WAN stack existed: LAN-like connectivity, private groups over a public provider network, high-speed access, multicast or group reachability, protocol flexibility, and manageable service operations.
Those requirements still apply. A modern WAN refresh should ask:
- Which sites need any-to-any connectivity and which should be hub-and-spoke?
- Which applications need predictable latency, loss, and jitter?
- Which services require private addressing, segmentation, or compliance boundaries?
- Where should encryption be applied even over provider private services?
- How will routing, failover, DNS, monitoring, and cloud access behave during an outage?
- Can the operations team troubleshoot both the underlay and overlay paths?
SMDS is no longer a service most organizations will buy or operate. Its legacy is the concept of a carrier-managed packet cloud that could make distant LANs feel connected. Today that idea lives on in MPLS VPNs, Carrier Ethernet, EVPN, SD-WAN overlays, and cloud networking, all of which keep chasing the same goal: flexible, reliable, private connectivity without a dedicated circuit between every pair of sites.
References
- RFC 1209: Transmission of IP Datagrams over the SMDS Service
- RFC 1304: Managed Objects for the SIP Interface Type
- Cisco: Configuring SMDS
- Tech Monitor: AT&T BNS-2000 broadband switch background
- RFC 4364: BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private Networks
- RFC 7432: BGP MPLS-Based Ethernet VPN
- MEF: Carrier Ethernet technical specifications