From owner-freebsd-isp Sat Apr 12 21:56:21 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id VAA15679 for isp-outgoing; Sat, 12 Apr 1997 21:56:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA15673 for ; Sat, 12 Apr 1997 21:56:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.5/8.6.9) with ESMTP id VAA16518; Sat, 12 Apr 1997 21:56:10 -0700 (PDT) To: spork cc: "Jeffrey J. Mountin" , Vincent Poy , isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: TS Holy War (was Re: Some advice needed.) In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 12 Apr 1997 20:07:01 EDT." Date: Sat, 12 Apr 1997 21:56:10 -0700 Message-ID: <16514.860907370@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-isp@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > But 200 customers is not an ISP, that's a hobby ;) You're clearly not very familiar with the rural ISP market. 200 is actually pretty good when you're trying to connect up folks in Podunk, Iowa. :-) Also, there seems to be a new phenomenon I've noticed more and more in the ISP market - ISPs which stay deliberately small, more sort of "internet access clubs" than anything else. They get to around 200-300 people and then *refuse* any new people, chosing instead to remain a small and manageable size. For some operators, all they want is a small community of users which generate enough revenue to keep the business going and pay the upstream provider's bills. More than that is only a hassle, and so they avoid it. In any case, I certainly take your point about the *general* merits of splitting things up, I simply wanted to also make the point that it's not always necessary and can, in fact, be more of a detriment to your operations if you don't actually need that much horsepower. Jordan