From owner-freebsd-hardware  Sun Jul  7 16:29:09 1996
Return-Path: owner-hardware
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA21534
          for hardware-outgoing; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 16:29:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zoo.toronto.edu (zoo.toronto.edu [128.100.72.1])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA21527
          for <hardware@freebsd.org>; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 16:29:07 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 19:28:54 -0400 (EDT)
From: Henry Spencer <henry@zoo.toronto.edu>
Subject: Re: cable vs. ISDN
To: Joel Yancey <python@cia-g.com>
cc: hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.91.960706233326.22897A-100000@gallup.cia-g.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9607071933.H20669-0100000@zoo.toronto.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> > ...For one thing, the 128k/10M split is just an oddity of *your*
> > local cable system -- the better-equipped ones are talking about symmetrical
> > bandwidth...
>
> Well, do you have proof otherwise? i heard this from a national bases, in 
> fact, from what *I* hear, they really dont exsist in the working form as 
> of yet.

Rogers Cable has been testing them, live, with real customers, in one of
the suburbs of Toronto.  Your informant is seriously behind the times.

                                                           Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@zoo.toronto.edu