Mailing List ArchiveSupport open source code!
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]Re: Tokyo high-speed access
- To: tlug@example.com
- Subject: Re: Tokyo high-speed access
- From: Jonathan Byrne <jq@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 15:24:31 +0900
- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
- In-Reply-To: <20010426041940.236B.SL@example.com>; from sl@example.com on Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 04:19:47AM +0900
- References: <20010418220103.9483.SL@example.com> <20010419133951.C30694@example.com> <20010426041940.236B.SL@example.com>
- Reply-To: tlug@example.com
- Resent-From: tlug@example.com
- Resent-Message-ID: <1K_EnC.A._EB.L8756@example.com>
- Resent-Sender: tlug-request@example.com
Stephen Lee (sl@example.com) wrote: > Is that a inherent limitation of the Flet's/OCN networks or simply that > ISPs are allocating less upstream bandwidth per Flet's/OCN user? That's an inherent limitation of Flet's and OCN. Neither Flet's nor OCN are dedicated 64 or 128 kbps services. Rather, the max. capacity of the point-to-point link is 64 or 128, but there is no service level agreement on it (they seem to be frame relay, or at least work on the same principle), so the more people you are sharing your Flet's or OCN cloud with, the less bandwidth you will get. Since there is no SLA, throughput could drop to near-zero and you would have no grounds for complaint. Like the saying goes: fast, good, cheap - pick any two. Jonathan
- References:
- Re: Tokyo high-speed access
- From: Stephen Lee <sl@example.com>
- Re: Tokyo high-speed access
- From: Jonathan Byrne <jq@example.com>
- Re: Tokyo high-speed access
- From: Stephen Lee <sl@example.com>
Home | Main Index | Thread Index
- Prev by Date: Future of open source I18N [was: Setting Deafult Font Size in X]
- Next by Date: Re: Tokyo high-speed access
- Prev by thread: Re: Tokyo high-speed access
- Next by thread: Re: Tokyo high-speed access
- Index(es):
Home Page Mailing List Linux and Japan TLUG Members Links