Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 11 Jul 1997 11:04:29 -0400
From:      dennis <dennis@etinc.com>
To:        Stephen Roome <steve@visint.co.uk>, Ulf Zimmermann <ulf@Alameda.net>
Cc:        shovey@buffnet.net, danf@JadeTech.com, isp@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: T1 upgrade options?
Message-ID:  <3.0.32.19970711110425.00c95ca0@etinc.com>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 12:25 PM 7/11/97 +0100, Stephen Roome wrote:
>On Wed, 9 Jul 1997, Ulf Zimmermann wrote:
>> > I still really don't understand why folks with only a T1 line insist on
>> > buying a separate router, we have E1 here and have a dual port serial
card
>> > and a mux. It costs the same to add onto a pc as a Cisco, you still get
>> > tech support and the PC that runs it doesn't do anything else or fall
over
>> > ever.
>> 
>> Why ? Because what ever system you run your T1 off, PC or SGI or whatever,
>> if it is not a dedicated router, people tend to run other services off it.
>> If you run other services off it, you tend to modify it (for example
>> reboot). That brings down your whole T1 line. I thought long about it,
>> as I started with just a Fractional T1 Frame Relay line for myself and 
>> decided at that point to go with a Cisco PC card. It is a complete router,
>> it just takes power from the PC and a com port emulation for the console
>> port. Even with this solution I power cycled the box it was in too often.

That's cause you we'ren't using the capabilities of your PCs power...the Cisco
card is a slow device with its own set of bugs. 

PCs set up as dedicated router are much more powerful and flexible than
standalone routers and typically have long uptimes....

Dennis
>
>Okay, valid point. =)
>I think it comes down to whether you chose to reboot the box or not, the
>only time I've had real downtime on our router is after a power cut, but
>then the power to the line goes down then at the main box in the street.
>
>Personally I don't reboot the PC router or run anything else on it, okay
>there's a secondary nameserver and that's too much as well, but in the six
>months since we got our E1 I've only rebooted the router once, and that
>was to take out the graphics card. It's just a standalone box which plodds
>happily along now.
>
>I suppose it's personal preference then, next time I'm doing this I'll
>look more carefully at using a Cisco or Livingston or something instead.
>
>> If customer ask me today about a standalone router or a PC card, I often
>> tell them to get a router like the Engage routers. a T1 with CSU version
>> cost $995 for ISPs. It has no large option in routing protocols, but
>> as an endpoint, they don't need much. The reason I tell them this, it is
>> a standalone box. A black box in the corner. No one is going to touch it.
>
>On the cost side of things you seem to have a very valid point, although
>I'm not sure the cost _should_ be an issue for a router for anything more
>than a 64k line as it's such a small fraction of the cost. Well, in the UK
>it is anyway. =)
>
>--
>Steve Roome - Vision Interactive Ltd.
>Tel:+44(0)117 9730597 Home:+44(0)976 241342
>WWW: http://dylan.visint.co.uk/
>
>
>



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3.0.32.19970711110425.00c95ca0>