From owner-freebsd-isp  Fri May 16 07:22:55 1997
Return-Path: <owner-isp>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id HAA00286
          for isp-outgoing; Fri, 16 May 1997 07:22:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from etinc.com (et-gw-fr1.etinc.com [204.141.244.98])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA00281
          for <isp@freebsd.org>; Fri, 16 May 1997 07:22:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dialup-usr11.etinc.com (dialup-usr11.etinc.com [204.141.95.132]) by etinc.com (8.8.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA05652; Fri, 16 May 1997 10:31:58 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970516101616.00c13634@etinc.com>
X-Sender: dennis@etinc.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32)
Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 10:16:20 -0400
To: Jim Shankland <jas@flyingfox.com>
From: dennis <dennis@etinc.com>
Subject: Re: interface card to connect 64k..256k to connect to internet
Cc: isp@freebsd.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-isp@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

At 01:50 PM 5/15/97 -0700, you wrote:
>Thanks to all for the feedback on this; it's been illuminating.  My
>take is that the case for the quad-sync card at an ISP or a corporat
>headquarters is stronger than that for the single-sync card in a
>remote-office or ISP-customer setting.  Price certainly is a factor,
>and personally, at $1K for a PCI-based, single-T1 card, I find it a
>hard sell compared to a Pipeline 130 with an integrated CSU *and* a
>BRI port for, say, $1300.  (And I can't say that I found derisive
>quote marks around the word "handle" in "handle a T1", or references
>to brands of automobiles, persuasive.)

Well, you know what they say..."you can't educate the woodchucks"...

Thanks for sharing your intellectual findings with us! Based on what
you've said I think that we will discontinue all of our single port products
because there is clearly no market for them.

:-)

Dennis