SLUG Mailing List Archives
Re: [SLUG] multi-link PPP
- To: Umar Goldeli <umar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [SLUG] multi-link PPP
- From: John Ferlito <johnf@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon Aug 21 11:44:10 2000
- Cc: DaZZa <dazza@xxxxxxxxxx>, Dave Fitch <davidf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, slug@xxxxxxxxxxx
- User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
On Mon, Aug 21, 2000 at 11:43:15AM +1000, Umar Goldeli wrote:
> > As for ISDN being easier - the investment in TE is probably equal to
> > dialups, byt tyhe provision for abuse in downloading is _much_ higher,
> > given that ISDN connections are usually permanent, and dialups can be
> > dropped off if they're abusing.
> Most ISP's nowadays use the same gear for their normal dialups as well as
> their ISDN connections - in fact - if they support 56k - they most
> definitely already have the gear for supporting isdn.
Acually the ISDN always works out cheaper for the ISP. Since the ISDN
call is purely digital you don't need to buy DSP cards for your access servers. Which
on Ciscos work out to about $20k per 120 channels.
Assuming people are paying by the meg than ISDN is always a better deal for the ISP.
By the hour it's not since you can pull a bit more down over ISDN than modem.