Hi gang!
I am an ADSL user since december, and lately have the chance to compare a
cable connection to ADSL one. here are my observations:
1) cable is extremly fast. Nonstop must have a fat pipe to IIX as i felt
like running on our LAN when browsing my webserver at the Technion.
2) Nonstop must have a modem line connecting it abroad, as i got few
bits/second internet connections with many disconnections.
When shoping for ADSL note that:
1) Bezeq will limit the uplink to 64 kb/s . this will limit download (tcp
based) to ~1.2 Mb/s
2) the new equipment from Orkit has 60 ms RTT , 30 of them inside one
network entity inside bezeq .
3) connecting your ADSL involves a PPTP session. I have no idea how many
concurent sessions you can have. An atempt to tie 2 comp. on an ADSL
simultaniously failed.
4) on the other hand, bypassing Bezeq Portal was no problem (meaning that
you could connect your Linux at boot automaticly and keep the connection
up).
Dani
On Tue, 15 Aug 2000, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Aug 2000, Mike Almogy wrote:
>
> > About cable modems, i read an article few month ago regarding to the "FAST"
> > connection to the web with cables.
>
> If you mean the article on People&Computers - it was kind of misleading.
>
> The title was something like "Fast Internet is no better than
> POTS". However - the conclusion was that it is "only" around 10 times
> faster (and that includes the speed of the line from the ISP to the rest
> of the Internet).
>
> > The article quote several engineers at very big cables companies and it was
> > written there that fast connection on cables is just an illusion.
> > What do i mean ?, well it said there that the mainproblem with cables is
> > that it is a shard medium, just like coax and hub connection.
> > That is, lots of users will have the same line together meaning that there
> > will be a situation that if someone is D/L a big file then all the rest will
> > be very slow.
>
> Chances are that the cables connection won't be the bottleneck:
> Cable modems give you around 2Mbps (*bits* per second) upstream and
> at least around 5Mbps downstream (shared) downstream (from the ISP to your
> computer).
>
> Does the ISP have a 5Mbps connection to IIX? to USA? So if you don't use
> your ISPs servers too much chances are that the bottleneck will be either
> his connection, or somewhere farther. Nothing to do with cables. ADSL has
> the same probem (maybe even ISDN connections have similar problems).
>
> > Just like now.
>
> No. We got around one bottleneck. We now talk about generally faster
> speeds.
>
> > There is NO progress in trying to overcome this problem ! each provider has
> > his own techniques how to overcome this problem.
> > More then that, there is no work on a protocol that will fix this problem !,
> > so there is a little chance thatthe problem will be fix in the near future.
> > It was said that users with GOOD isp with 56,600 modems will receive a
> > better connection then users of the cables.
>
> One true point here is that cables don't easily scale well. Unlike
> ethernets you can't simply segment your network when you have too many
> nodes on the same segment.
>
> >
> > I will try to find this article and to scan it.
> > I really hope that i'm mistaken, the article was written almost a year ago,
> > so maybe something was changed.
>
> Than you probably refer to a diffeent article than the one I meant.
>
> > > guy keren wrote:
> > > >
> > > > hi,
> > > >
> > > > today i got a cable modem connected at home (nonstop is doing now a
> > > > "test" at the haifa area). nonstop supports windows (maybe macs as
> > well),
> > >> not linux. However, setting it up for linux was rather simple (using
> > > > 'pump' to configure the network interface via their DHCP server, and
> > > > guessing some gateway address for the defual troute).
> > > >
> > > > the cable modem connects to the t.v. socket, and then, via a UTP
> > ethernet
> > > > cable, connects to the computer. unlike ADSL, no special "provider
> > > > choosing" software seems to be needed here. on the machine itself, they
> > > > insisted installing their own network adapter (3com 905 10/100), rather
> > > > then use the already installed NIC. one strange thing about the cable
> > > > modem - afterconnecting it to the power line, it takes between 15
> > minutes
> > > > and 45 minutes until the modem manages to connect to nonstop's cable
> > > > network (the technicians said something about finding a "return
> > channel").
> > > >
> > > > the connection to nonstop's web server is very fast (download under
> > win98
> > > > was at about 180 KB/sec), but connection to the external internet is
> > much
> > > > slower - downloading files was at rates of 7KB - 16KB per second. they
> > > > connect to the internet via barak, as traceroute showed. i tried this
> > > > connection at around 18:30 . maybe it's different for other times of the
> > > > day.
> > > >
> > > > if anyone else happens to join their experimental program and needs some
> > > > help, i could try to assist with setup under linux.
>
> --
> Tzafrir Cohen
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir
>
>
>
> =================================================================
> To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
> echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
