🚀 go-pugleaf

fbauer@access1.digex.net (Fred Bauer) wrote:
>>
>>So what you're really saying is that Digex is trying to fit their BIG trucks 
>>down one of BAs little roads designed for smaller trucks because some obsolete 
>>tariff says they can. And now they are complaining about the road builder 
>>because the tires of their trucks keep falling off the edge of the road 
>>resulting in alot of flat tires, ultimately limiting their ability to deliver 
>>the furniture in a single day. 

>No, this is not at all accurate.  The only way to provide Dial-up service is
>on Dial-up phone lines.  If you want guaranteed bandwidth, then you need to
>but a Leased or Frame Relay service.  The comparison is just not valid, because
>those other "Roads" are not accessable to a dial-up user.

I was under the impression that Digiex was backhauling traffic between
wire centers on voice grade FX circuits. I was wrong and shouldn't
have pointed the finger at Digex, but I would still dispute any
argument against my analogy.  The "bigger roads" are available to the
residential (dial-up?) user (switched 56, ISDN, etc), they're just
more expensive.

Theoretically, the real problem here is the development and
advancement of analog modem technology. It seems as if we're up
against the bandwidth limits of what's capable via analog POTS
circuits, and to be fair, I don't think that's Digex's or Bell
Atlantic's fault. Clearly, BA (or any new competitor to the market) is
not going to install new miles of copper (probably obsolete beyond
analog 28.8 anyway) to serve ever increasing bandwith requirements --
that would be rediculous. So I'd have to argue that the previous
analogy holds, but actually applies to us as end users rather than
Digex, as the ones who are trying to force BIG trucks down little
roads.

So the underlying gripe is really one of price and who should pay. As
technology has evolved, we as residential users have become accustomed
to using low cost voice grade service as a means for low cost, low
speed data transmission (which it was apparently never designed for).
From now on, if *we* users want increased bandwith (access to the
bigger roads), I guess we'll have to start paying our fair share for
it in the form of data circuits and data transmission equipment. The
alternative of course is to live with the existing speed limitations
and complain, complain, complain.

I guess the only  ones left to point the finger at are the modem
manufacturers, they new the limitations, didn't they?

Only my opinion...

Mark