From owner-freebsd-isp  Wed Jan 15 03:30:06 1997
Return-Path: <owner-isp>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id DAA22356
          for isp-outgoing; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 03:30:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bear.beyond2000.co.uk (bear.beyond2000.co.uk [194.217.248.11])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id DAA22340
          for <freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 03:30:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bear.beyond2000.co.uk (bear.beyond2000.co.uk [194.217.248.11]) by bear.beyond2000.co.uk (8.7.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA25563; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 11:34:34 GMT
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 11:34:33 +0000 ()
From: Bernard Jauregui <bernard@beyond2000.co.uk>
To: Cybertwig from Montreal <twiggy@io.org>
cc: freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Ascend for modems.
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970115052211.5712B-100000@zap.io.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.970115111220.24294C-100000@bear.beyond2000.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-isp@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk



On Wed, 15 Jan 1997, Cybertwig from Montreal wrote:

> 	We might be considering upgrading more then 500 modems, so far we
> have considered Usr, Microcoms (the best deal so far), Telebit, Ascend.
> 	If you curently used those brands or did consider them could you
> tell me what made you choose a brand over the other.

We recently chose the Ascend  MAX4000 range for the following reasons :

   1) Eventually they matched the best price
   2) So much functionality is included in the chassis price
   3) I used them with the UK's largest ISP (Demon Internet - 80,000+ users)
   4) The support package was first class (4hour replacement)
   5) System software is highly configurable
   6) Genuinely useful console and logging (uses syslog)

Down points were :

   1) We ended up having to develope our own Radius server 
      (It's very good if anyone is interested - uses a SQL database and
      is completely merged with our admin systems, DNS, NIS etc...)
   2) They run very hot
   3) Entry level (say 15 lines) is expensive
   4) Not very flexible as a terminal server
      (can't do telnet <hostname> <userid> <password> <port>)

All in all, as we expect to be supporting over ten thousand users with a 
high growth rate, I think we made the right decision. 

We also considered a similar unit from Shiva 

BJ
CamNet - The Cambridge FreeNet