> On Fri, 30 May 1997, Charles Scott wrote:
>
> > Bitsurfr's at each end and we're running the serial ports at 230.4K to
> > PortMaster serial ports at each end. Ping times run a minimum of just
>
> OOh that is a bad way to do it because bitsmurfers convert to analog and
> you loose about 20%.
Which is why we're using 230K.
> > under 70 ms. Obviously, that would be the same regardless of the number
> > of B channels we had up and running.
>
> Thats terrible. My customers with 2b channels get 25ms ping times.
>
> > The 70 ms time is obviously much more than you would normally get with
> > FR but the throughput is the important part (to everyone except the
> > real-time game players).
>
> > I'd rather be running FR or a conventional dedicated line to that
> > location but the numbers didn't work out in this case. Unfortunately the
> > reliability of those ISDN lines is not as good as what we've seen
> > elsewhere which may push us to finally put in a "real" circuit.
>
> I bet you can increase your thruput if you get some better ta's or get
> some isdn routers like the or-u
This was obviously a price issue. We upgraded the link from a 56K
dedicated to the two ISDN FX lines. This give us 256K throughput at what
amounts to about 1/2 the cost of a dedicated 256K circuit and it used the
existing PortMaster's at both ends. Excluding cost, my preference would
be a T-1 to each POP, but somehow price does play into all this.
Chuck