> > 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.
>
Yah but even so, you are loosing at lesat 15% of your POTENTIAL. I have
some numbers to prove it.
> 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
Are you saying FX as in foreign exchange?
> 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.
Yes price is an issue.
~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~
Jake Messinger 713-772-6690 jake@ams.com
Advanced Medical Systems, Inc. jake@uh.edu
9919 S. Gessner #201
Houston, Texas 77071 http://www.ams.com/~jake
~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~