On Sun, Dec 23, 2001 at 03:09:26PM -0800, Chris Large wrote:
From what you say, we would need to make a big investment in connetions. I guess it is out of the question for for waht we have now. We have only 23 dial-in lines so i don't think it is worth the incestment.
Are you by any chance talking about ISDN? This is much easier/cheaper.
Yes, that would be much more logical than ADSL.. With ISDN, you'd only have to buy expansioncards for your racks or trade-in your modems for ISDN/POTS modems which can handle ISDN and analog for Flex and X2.. Much cheaper and plausible sounding, assuming you are hosting your own racks. Yes, you said you were. Well, I guess ADSL indeed requires very large amounts of bandwidth. Imagine that you are to be delivering ADSL (512k) to 30 users, and assuming a usage of 3:1; you would be talking about a bandwidth of about 5mbps. But offcourse you'd want an overhead. The larger the amount of users, the smaller the overhead needs to be. So if you reckon your users are all home or office-users (not the geeks that get Fast ADSL of 1280k), you would get an extra 1mb on top of the 5mb. But I guess it's all up to the statistics. Home-users will eventually be surfing during non-office hours, so they can use the bandwidth originally bought for the office-users and so on. In any case, you would have to make sure all your users can get at least a third of their max. bandwidth. So you've got to get that much from the Telco. It's not cheap! Most ISP's dont really make money on ADSL. It's a faitly new technique they want to master. It will eventually be costing either loads of money or be almost free. Kind Regards, Rogier Maas