Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 11:45:00 -0500 From: dennis@etinc.com (dennis) To: Joe Greco <jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com> Cc: isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: changed to: Frac T3? Message-ID: <199611181645.LAA29193@etinc.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> >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. It changes the clock rate, which effectively is Frac T3. > >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. I dont know who the "some" are, but clock switching is pretty popular since a lot of HSSI products can do full T3. > >> >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...... I said our PCI product will be able to do 32Mbs without modification....ISA is only 27-40Mbs...pretty hard to do 32Mbs full duplex on it. Dennis
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199611181645.LAA29193>