Date: Mon, 06 Jan 1997 18:48:57 -0500 From: dennis <dennis@etinc.com> To: isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD as T1 router Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970106184854.00a86bc0@etinc.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
T. Li writes.... > > My provider could be lying to me...but I doubt it since hes an old > colleague. > >Doesn't mean he's lying. Could be that he's just doing something wrong... >Could be a software or hardware problem. We have no data. Cisco told him its their problem...they're working on it. Yay! > > >Your generalizations are showing. > > And its not a "generalization", its a specific example to illustrate my > point. The thing pigs out without being near to its published capacity.... > >Like any other sophisticated technology, it can be misused. We do know >what a 7000 can do. What you describe is well below what it can and has >done. But, given the appropriately broken configuration (e.g., trying to do >X.25 at 4Mbps), well above what the worst case. X.25 is just a protocol...why would one protocol work at 4Mbs and not another? There is no good reason to be able to run Frame Relay at high speed and not X.25. if anything, X.25 should be more reliable because it can be throttled by the receiver. We do X.25 at 10Mbs easily.....alas theres not a lot of need for it :( So what you're saying is that there are some things that work and some that don't, which kind of makes this whole discussion moot...if you happen to be using something that is "broken" (by your definition, whatever criteria you might be using), then you are up sh*ts creek. Sound like a crapshoot, no matter who the vendor is. Might as well save the money. Dennis
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3.0.32.19970106184854.00a86bc0>