On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 08:22 -0400, Andrew Kohlsmith wrote: > I think you'll find that for most dialup applications, 10:1 is about right > when you've got a large number of channels, even according to the erlang > calculations.
I dont know about other countries, but in 1997 I worked at an ISP. The iunternet was popular enough then and dialup was $20/mo. At that point in time 7:1 was good to reduce busy signals for all but 1 hour a day (split morning and afternoon). 10:1 resulted in many hours of busy signals. Now I would imagine that the demand for dialup, at least in reasonably urban environments such as where I worked, has stayed about constant, as there are more people on now, but most urbanites have dsl, cable, etc rather than relying on modems (at that point in time where I was it was dialup or frame relay/t1). Given that dialup is $10/mo now I cant imagine that it has gone down in demand so much that a 10:1 is 'good'. From a business perspective it might be (churn rate is 'acceptable', tech support isnt hearing complaints all day long about busy signals, the cost to add extra ports is greater than the cost of dealing with users leaving and/or complaining) but I cant imagine that its all that good of service. -- Trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com Bret McDanel UK +44 870 340 4605 Germany +49 801 777 555 3402 US +1 360 207 0479 or +1 516 687 5200 FreeWorldDialup: 635378
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
