From owner-freebsd-isp Sun Aug 25 13:26:49 1996 Return-Path: owner-isp Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA02791 for isp-outgoing; Sun, 25 Aug 1996 13:26:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from who.cdrom.com (who.cdrom.com [204.216.27.3]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA02742 for ; Sun, 25 Aug 1996 13:26:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brasil.moneng.mei.com (brasil.moneng.mei.com [151.186.109.160]) by who.cdrom.com (8.7.5/8.6.11) with ESMTP id GAA24900 for ; Sun, 25 Aug 1996 06:59:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from jgreco@localhost) by brasil.moneng.mei.com (8.7.Beta.1/8.7.Beta.1) id IAA29158; Sun, 25 Aug 1996 08:55:42 -0500 From: Joe Greco Message-Id: <199608251355.IAA29158@brasil.moneng.mei.com> Subject: Re: 128k ISDN vs. T1 To: rls@shell.id.net (Robert Shady) Date: Sun, 25 Aug 1996 08:55:41 -0500 (CDT) Cc: jsuter@bsd.intrastar.net, ulf@Lamb.net, kyricc@inetnebr.com, freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199608250154.VAA15557@shell.id.net> from "Robert Shady" at Aug 24, 96 09:54:12 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-isp@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > Sorry to be rude, but another "Wanna-be-ISP". First it looks like you should > > go and read more about what is possible in telecommunication hardware. > > Like that ISDN is not upgradable over that 128K. That there exist Fractional > > T1. Frame Relay. And so on and so on. > > Well, obviously another clueless "thinks-he's-an-isp"... Ever hear of > ISDN PRI? We're running 23 channels of ISDN here, works rather well... ISDN PRI? You are suggesting multiplexing > 2 ISDN B's? Eeeeccch... I think I have to agree with the original poster... since "technically possible" and "something you would want to do" are two very different things. At the point where you are doing that, why NOT go with F-T1? It is designed precisely to cope with that sort of thing. Making ISDN do it is like trying to hammer a screw into a wall. ... JG