Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 29 Feb 2000 08:53:25 -0800
From:      "Mark Holloway" <mholloway@flashmail.com>
To:        <freebsd-isp@freebsd.org>
Subject:   OC3 versus T1 Circuits
Message-ID:  <002001bf82d5$7f5a6a20$a52410ac@sierrahealth.com>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_001D_01BF8292.709E6C90
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I have a situation and maybe some of you can please advise:

I have a core LAN/MAN/WAN campus with approximately 80 servers.  I have =
about ten different remote sites throughout the city (the MAN) which =
clients log into a Windows NT domain and then access certain =
applications.  Until late 1999 they were running these applications in a =
client/server fashion.  The ten sites are all on a shared FDDI ring, but =
each location is a 10MB, shared, half duplex connection.  The original =
strategy was to have a full OC3 from the main campus going to a Sprint =
Central Office, then have 10MB fractional OC3 going to each site (almost =
like Frame Relay in the MAN).  However, we have since setup many Windows =
Terminal Servers (25 servers @ 200 clients per server) and the clients =
are using Citrix on their local desktops.  This solution works well.  =
But now I am wondering if the fractional OC3 is overkill??  I was =
thinking maybe either a T1 line or two T1 lines bonded for EACH SITE =
rather than a 10MB OC3 for each site would be more realistic?  Is a T1 =
really .15 MB?  Or 1.5MB?   I think the slowness that most people =
experience is due to the nature of the FDDI.  Each site averages about =
60 clients, but a couple have up to 150 clients.  When using Citrix =
everything runs fine.  The only apps they would run locally are Outlook =
and some telnet sessions (pure ANSI, little overhead). =20

I apologize if this is too off topic, but I've always tried to =
contribute to this list whenever possible.  One thing to keep in mind is =
that for each OC3 remote connection we were going to buy a 3Com =
Pathbuilder 330 (designed for fractional OC3).  This is approximately =
$12,000 + the Pathbuilder 700 Ethernet blade for the the WAN switch at =
the main campus (another several thousand dollars).  A Cisco 2500 or =
2600 with bonded T1 is under $2000. =20

PLEASE, if anyone has any insite, feedback, or comments, I'd really =
appreciate it.=20

Regards,
Mark


------=_NextPart_000_001D_01BF8292.709E6C90
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I have a situation and maybe some of =
you can please=20
advise:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I have a core LAN/MAN/WAN campus with =
approximately=20
80 servers.&nbsp; I have about ten different remote sites throughout the =
city=20
(the MAN) which clients log into a Windows NT domain and then access =
certain=20
applications.&nbsp; Until late 1999 they were running these applications =
in a=20
client/server fashion.&nbsp; The ten sites are all on a shared FDDI =
ring, but=20
each location is a 10MB, shared, half duplex connection.&nbsp; The =
original=20
strategy was to have a full OC3 from the main campus going to a Sprint =
Central=20
Office, then have 10MB fractional OC3 going to each site (almost like =
Frame=20
Relay in the MAN).&nbsp; However, we have since setup many Windows =
Terminal=20
Servers (25 servers @ 200 clients per server) and the clients are using =
Citrix=20
on their local desktops.&nbsp; This solution works well.&nbsp; But now I =
am=20
wondering if the fractional OC3 is overkill??&nbsp; I was thinking maybe =
either=20
a T1 line or two T1 lines bonded for EACH SITE rather than a 10MB OC3 =
for each=20
site would be more realistic?&nbsp; Is a T1 really .15 MB?&nbsp; Or=20
1.5MB?&nbsp;&nbsp; I think the slowness that most people experience is =
due to=20
the nature of the FDDI.&nbsp; Each site averages about 60 clients, but a =
couple=20
have up to 150 clients.&nbsp; When using Citrix everything runs =
fine.&nbsp; The=20
only apps they would run locally are Outlook and some telnet sessions =
(pure=20
ANSI, little overhead).&nbsp; </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I apologize if this is too off topic, =
but I've=20
always tried to contribute to this list whenever possible.&nbsp; One =
thing to=20
keep in mind is that for each OC3 remote connection we were going to buy =
a 3Com=20
Pathbuilder 330 (designed for fractional OC3).&nbsp; This is =
approximately=20
$12,000 + the Pathbuilder 700 Ethernet blade for the the WAN switch at =
the main=20
campus (another several thousand dollars).&nbsp; A Cisco 2500 or 2600 =
with=20
bonded T1 is under $2000.&nbsp; </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>PLEASE, if anyone has any insite, =
feedback, or=20
comments, I'd really appreciate it. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Regards,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Mark</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_001D_01BF8292.709E6C90--



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?002001bf82d5$7f5a6a20$a52410ac>