Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 09:04:05 -0500 (CDT) From: Joe Greco <jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com> To: rls@mail.id.net (Robert Shady) Cc: jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com, rls@shell.id.net, jsuter@bsd.intrastar.net, ulf@lamb.net, kyricc@inetnebr.com, freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 128k ISDN vs. T1 Message-ID: <199608261404.JAA29967@brasil.moneng.mei.com> In-Reply-To: <199608252058.QAA11788@server.id.net> from "Robert Shady" at Aug 25, 96 04:58:54 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > 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. > > ISDN Primary Rate Interface Service is 23 ISDN B channels, and a single > ISDN D channel coming in over a single T1. The original post was meant to > be a slam against a poster who suggested using ISDN, the response was > "ISDN is *NOT* upgradable over 128K"... I mearly suggest that "ISDN" doesn't > really have any limit to it's upgradability, or at least, surely not 128K... > Now whether it is a viable solution for an Internet up-link is another > topic I'd be happy to discuss.. We have several companies that think the > savings of using ISDN vs. FT1 is well worth the minor inconviences that > ISDN has... I'm well aware of what ISDN PRI is, and of course ISDN doesn't have any "real" limits, my question is simply whether or not it makes sense to try to do it. I can run 24 33.6K modems in parallel and get a lot of bandwidth too, I'm just not sure it's a smart thing to try to do. ;-) ... JG
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199608261404.JAA29967>