Venice Project would break many users' ISP conditions
OUT-LAW News, 03/01/2007
Internet television system The Venice Project could break users' monthly
internet bandwith limits in hours, according to the team behind it.
It downloads 320 megabytes (MB) per hour from users' computers, meaning
http://louisville.bizjournals.com/louisville/stories/2007/01/08/story6.html?t=printable
--
Regards,
Peter Radizeski
RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist
We Help ISPs Connect Communicate
813.963.5884
http://www.marketingIDEAguy.com
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
1GB Fiber is typically using Packet over SONET.
I have typically seen over 500 mbps on these links, even from Telcove/L3.
But the distance is usually a factor.
Running from NoLa to ATL on a long-haul, single hop 1GB fiber run
introduces lots of regen issues, so 500 mbps would be a blessing.
Great points Butch!
There are products out there that claim load balancing and failover, but
there is only one way to do both, and that is through bonding. Bonding
requires that the circuits be terminated in one router on your end and one
router on the provider end.
The only true failover with
Jeff,
The solution is simply a hardware upgrade for starters. A 32-bit/33 MHz
bus
will top out around 200 Mbps. If you look for a bus with higher speed
slots, you can triple your throughput without adjusting ANYTHING in your
Linux kernel.
Well thats where I disagree. And where I am looking
I wonder if MT will be able to block it. Because right now I don't allow
p2p or bit torrent on my network, and it is successfully blocked by MT.
You have a good day now,en mag jou more's ook so wees.
Carl A Jeptha
http://www.jeptha.com
905-349-2027
skype cajeptha
Dawn DiPietro
Back home...ahhh to bad when it ends...
Frankly , I don't know ... maybe has to due with the TDD system, next
firmware release should improve overall pps capacity
Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145
-Original
Gino,
After you informed me of the way prioritization occurs in your solution,
I asked one of our sharp engineers to articulate the differences to me.
Here was his reply back and I'd be interested in your feedback:
The [prioritization mechanism in the] __ system is different than VL
in
http://www.linksys.com/servlet/Satellite?c=L_Promotion_C2childpagename=US%2FLayoutcid=1162878004771pagename=Linksys%2FCommon%2FVisitorWrapper
SPA962 - 6-Line IP Phone with Color Display
Looks interesting.
--
George
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
Patrick, I agree with your engineer's description. But I'd argue the use of
the word prioritization is incorrectly applied to Canopy. Canopy doesn't
prioritize VoIP. Priority schemes infer media access preference. Canopy's
separate pre-allocated partitions have nothing to do with
I guess the rest haven't found their fish...
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Forbes Mercy
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:28 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Brad B, I got your answer on the pinout for
BreezeACCESSVL
I am
*Internet phone company Vonage said Monday that it plans to use EarthLink's
citywide Wi-Fi infrastructure to provide wireless broadband service along
with its voice over Internet Protocol service to customers.*
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-6148275.html
--
Dylan Oliver
Primaverity, LLC
--
12 matches
Mail list logo