[Home] [Groups] - Message: [Prev in Group] [Next in Group]
1571: Re: [MUD-Dev] Languages
[Full Header] [Plain Text]
From: clawrenc@cup.hp.com
Newsgroups: nu.kanga.list.mud-dev
Date: Tue, 20 May 97 13:45:25 -0700
References: [1]
Organization: Kanga.Nu
In <3.0.32.19970518132921.009a5fe4@mail.tenetwork.com>, on 05/18/97
at 01:31 PM, Jeff Kesselman <jeffk@tenetwork.com> said:
>> From: coder@ibm.net
>>
>> Side notes: This may be changing. There are two promises in the wind
>> for this area: Cable modems: which would mean this machine would be
>> online 24hrs a day and I'd finally be able to offer a real FTP/Web site >>et al
>Um. not unless it was a VERY slow one.
>Virtually all cable modems are asymetric, whiel they provide
>(theoreticl;y) great downstream bandwidth to the user, they provide
>not much mroe thena standard modem back upstream. (Soem even USE a
>seperate telephone loine and modem, depending on whether the cable
>comapny is willign to install the back-channel equiptment on their
>net or not.)
In this specific case (when it comes to my area) they are offering a
fixed IP address, and (as you say) shared upstream bandwidth. Judging
from the effective upstream bandwidth a friend is experiencing with
the same company in the LA basin (where there are many subscribers to
the net service), effective upstream bandwidth usually runs
equivalently to a dedicated bonded ISDN pair (128Kbps).
As happens said friend is also running a web site from his home
machine -- thru-put is quite respectable.
>Cable mdoems are another one of those misunderstood technologies that
>everyone is playing wishful-thinking on...
Yup, but this is one of the better offerings AFACT.
--
J C Lawrence Internet: claw@null.net
(Contractor) Internet: coder@ibm.net
---------------(*) Internet: clawrenc@cup.hp.com
...Honorary Member Clan McFUD -- Teamer's Avenging Monolith...