From owner-freebsd-isp Mon Nov 18 06:14:07 1996 Return-Path: owner-isp Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA15755 for isp-outgoing; Mon, 18 Nov 1996 06:14:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from brasil.moneng.mei.com (brasil.moneng.mei.com [151.186.109.160]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id GAA15727 for ; Mon, 18 Nov 1996 06:13:53 -0800 (PST) Received: (from jgreco@localhost) by brasil.moneng.mei.com (8.7.Beta.1/8.7.Beta.1) id IAA02190; Mon, 18 Nov 1996 08:12:46 -0600 From: Joe Greco Message-Id: <199611181412.IAA02190@brasil.moneng.mei.com> Subject: Re: changed to: Frac T3? To: dennis@etinc.com (dennis) Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 08:12:46 -0600 (CST) Cc: jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com, isp@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199611161656.LAA13898@etinc.com> from "dennis" at Nov 16, 96 11:56:08 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-isp@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > >I don't see that happening here, at least locally. > > > >What I usually see is people going for T3, the circuit costs are not so > >terribly different, and then the upstream provider meters bandwidth or > >performs rate limiting of some sort. > > It is my understanding that the "rate-limiting" was flipping switches > on the T3 CSU/DSU,which is fractional T3 (ie, adjusting the clock > rate). That IS what I'm talking about! Rate limiting can be achieved in a number of ways. "Flipping switches on the CSU/DSU" generally increases latency. One can rate limit in software, or alternatively simply meter usage and if a threshold is exceeded, possibly raise the customer's rate. Hey, I'm not advocating it... I'm just saying what is currently done by some. > >Sure. But your ISA based product is going to get a little slow handling > >such high speeds, I would think? Maybe not. I would rather see a PCI > >based solution, but that is just personal preference. > > Im not talking about ISA...... Then what ARE you talking about? ... JG