From: David Honig (honig@sprynet.com)
Date: Sat Mar 04 2000 - 14:40:27 PST
At 03:37 PM 3/4/00 -0500, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
I
>hadn't wanted to post a detailed expanation on something that's mostly
>off-topic, but....
<GIST>
The hardware out there implements decisions about how many RF-TV-channels
to allocate to digital, and the allocation
of up/downstream within that.
</GIST>
Its not the up/down allocation that's the concern: its
the ham-handedness in denying 'servers' in their contract,
instead of say specifying the upstream rate ("you must not generate more
than 384 kbps x 24 hours per day upstream").
*Any* network will be limited by its true bandwidth, even if
all the 900 Mhz worth of RF analog pap is replaced by digital traffic,
up/down shared any way you want, oversold as many
times as market practice lets you get away with :-)
But, geez, let people use their pipe any way they want, within the limits
of what they paid for. Maybe that's the problem.
The marketeers won't let the engineers point out that
certain values are peak, that everyone can't flush the toilet
at the same time.
Apologies for continuing this tangent,
DH
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Mar 04 2000 - 14:46:54 PST