On Mon, 09 Dec 2013 06:37:05 +, Gary Buhrmaster said:
It has been a long long time, but for the truly crazy, I
thought it was possible to write single characters at a
time (using a Set Buffer Address and then the character)
as long as you had set up the field attributes previously.
Lots
On 12/8/2013 9:48 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
Very specifically:
A 3270 that took 5 seconds of delay and then *snapped* the entire screen
up at once was perceived as faster than a 9600 tty that painted the same
entire screen in about a second and a half or so. Don't remember who it
was either, but
- Original Message -
From: Phil Karn k...@philkarn.net
On 12/06/2013 05:54 AM, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
Currently, without a limit, there is nothing to convince a end user to
make any attempt at conserving bandwidth and no revenue to cover the
cost of additional equipment to serve
On Dec 9, 2013, at 11:38 AM, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
It costs you nothing to let people use capacity that would otherwise go
to waste, and it increases the perceived value of your service. Your
customers will eventually find themselves depending on that excess
capacity often
- Original Message -
From: Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net
While fiber installation can be expensive, one needs to ask the local
municipalities to install extra conduit every time the earth is broken
for a local project.
You will perhaps recall that I put NANOG through teaching me
On 12/9/13 2:03 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
On Dec 9, 2013, at 11:38 AM, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
It costs you nothing to let people use capacity that would otherwise go
to waste, and it increases the perceived value of your service. Your
customers will eventually find themselves
On 12/06/2013 05:54 AM, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
Currently, without a limit, there is nothing to convince a end user to
make any attempt at conserving bandwidth and no revenue to cover the
cost of additional equipment to serve high bandwidth customers.By
adding a cap or overage charge we can
On 12/8/2013 7:55 PM, Phil Karn wrote:
It costs you nothing to let people use capacity that would otherwise go
to waste, and it increases the perceived value of your service.
Sometimes, yes. Othertimes, perhaps not.
I seem to recall an early bit of research on interactive computing
(maybe
- Original Message -
From: Dave Crocker d...@dcrocker.net
I seem to recall an early bit of research on interactive computing
(maybe by Sackman) that showed user preference for a /worse/ average
response time that was more predictable (narrower range of variance)
than a better average
On 12/9/2013 12:48 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
A 3270 that took 5 seconds of delay and then *snapped* the entire screen
up at once was perceived as faster than a 9600 tty that painted the same
entire screen in about a second and a half or so. Don't remember who it
was either, but likely Bell
On 12/8/2013 11:48 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Dave Crocker d...@dcrocker.net
I seem to recall an early bit of research on interactive computing
(maybe by Sackman) that showed user preference for a /worse/ average
response time that was more predictable
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Jeff Kell jeff-k...@utc.edu wrote:
... With 3270 you have little choice other
than full screen transactions.
It has been a long long time, but for the truly crazy, I
thought it was possible to write single characters at a
time (using a Set Buffer Address and then
On 12/5/13 7:35 PM, Phil Karn wrote:
On 12/05/2013 02:00 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
If ATT has capped me, then, I haven’t managed to hit the cap as yet.
Admittedly, the connection isn’t always as reliable as $CABLECO, but
when it works, it tends to work at full speed and it does work the
vast
On 12/06/2013 05:54 AM, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
I realize most of the NANOG operators are not running end user
networks anymore. Real consumption data:
Monthly_GBCountPercent
100GB 3658 90%
100-149 368 10%
150-199 173 4.7%
200-249 97
On Dec 6, 2013 5:16 PM, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com wrote:
On 12/06/2013 05:54 AM, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
I realize most of the NANOG operators are not running end user networks
anymore. Real consumption data:
Monthly_GBCountPercent
100GB 3658 90%
100-149 368
On 12/6/13 8:14 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
Thanks for the stats, real life is always refreshing :)
It seems to me -- all things being equal -- that the real question is
whether Mr. Hog is impacting your
other users. If he's not, then what difference does it make if he
consumes the bits, or if
16 matches
Mail list logo
