I don't think it's really offtopic. If you have a good firewall already you shouldn't need the router/firewall functionality of the Cisco thing the provider is suggesting. Their suggestion is probably based on the assumption that the customer has nothing already and is ignorant.
Unless the connection comes in from the street as Ethernet you'll need some kind of modem that connects to the fibre on the street and gives you an RJ45 to plug into. Perhaps their suggested expensive Cisco model has the modem already built in. If you get your own suitable modem you might have to fight the provider for the setup details. How long would it take to switch from the cheap to the expensive plan? You could start on the cheap one and test it out, if it's too congested switch up. Or get both plans and connections for a month or two so you have an immediate fallback. Given the relative costs the cheaper plan looks almost irrelevant. > The much higher speeds and lower price are > definitely enticing but we couldn't operate if speeds fell below 30 to > 50 Mbps. Your contract guarantees you only 30Mbps, so doesn't guarantee you remaining operational either if you need 50Mbps. HTH, Volker -- Volker Kuhlmann http://volker.top.geek.nz/ Please do not CC list postings to me. _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list Linux-users@lists.canterbury.ac.nz http://lists.canterbury.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
