Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2007 16:00:35 -0500 From: Tim Daneliuk <tundra@tundraware.com> To: RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ADSL Bandwidth Monitoring Message-ID: <46E30D73.3000603@tundraware.com> In-Reply-To: <20070908214744.03710ef8@gumby.homeunix.com.> References: <46E2AEA8.4060403@adempiere.org> <70e8236f0709080735p1e60453cp435f58127c7a35fd@mail.gmail.com> <46E2BCB2.9010909@adempiere.org> <84b68b3d0709081225x4fb929fck38a3265846f7b8ba@mail.gmail.com> <46E305BA.3040604@tundraware.com> <20070908214744.03710ef8@gumby.homeunix.com.>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
RW wrote: > On Sat, 08 Sep 2007 15:27:38 -0500 > Tim Daneliuk <tundra@tundraware.com> wrote: > >> Amitabh Kant wrote: >>> On 9/8/07, Bahman M. <b.movaqar@adempiere.org> wrote: >>>> I tested the connection by downloading 2~3 files simultaneously >>>> and used 'bmon' as Mel suggested in another reply (thanks to >>>> him). As I'd already guessed the RX don't get bigger than 30~40% >>>> of the expected bandwidth. I performed the test with some other >>>> files and there was no difference. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Bahman >>> The bandwidth being advertised by your ISP would be the maximum >>> thoughput allowed on your DSL lines with multiple DSL users sharing >>> the same bandwidth, something that is generally known as contention >>> ratio. >>> >>> See this link: >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contention_ratio >>> >>> Amitabh >> But you should be able to hit the advertised bandwidth. To the best >> of my knowledge, DSL itself is NOT a shared medium. It is a point-to- >> point technology from your premise to the Central Office. The >> bandwidth *behind* the CO may be shared, but should be so large >> as to not be a bottleneck. > > It depends on your circumstances. Some people are constrained by > contention ratio some aren't. Some ISPs offer a better ratio for a > more expensive accounts. I don't understand this. If the actual DSL circuit is point-to-point - i.e., not shared between the premise and the DSLAM in the CO, just exactly *where* is the contention occuring? I would think (and could be wrong) that the only other place would be in the bandwidth behind the DSLAM - the actual phone network. But this is typically very, very high capacity stuff, at least here in the US, and I sort of doubt it couldn't deliver the stated bandwidth. Not arguing here, just wondering... -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tim Daneliuk tundra@tundraware.com PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?46E30D73.3000603>