🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4aruh2$mco@umbc7.umbc.edu>,
Dan Dinkin; ACS <dan@umbc7.umbc.edu> wrote:
>
>In article <4ancah$ghq@news.cais.com>, jdfalk@cais.cais.com (J.D. Falk) writes:
>> In digex.general, digex.slip, balt.general, and dc.general,
>> 	Andrew Leonard <aleonard@access.digex.net> wrote... 
>> 
>> > One question is nagging at me (and I'm sure you or someone has
>> > answered, but I missed the answer) - Why is Digex the only place in
>> > the area to have these problems? People connect to BBS's at 28.8
>> > extremely often. Why is Digex so unique in this case?
>> 
>> 	I've seen similar complaints here in dc.general (and other
>> newsgroups) about a number of other ISP's.
>
>Actually, I believe UMBC is suffering from a similar problem.  We just
>brought up a set of Ascend MAX's with 28.8 modems in them.  Many of
>ours users are mentioning that they are not quite getting to 28.8.  We

Ascend Max is a digitial handoff.  It avoids the bandwidth 
limitations of the SLC digitial-analog conversion cards so the only 
explanation for slow connect speeds is the caller calling in via a SLC on 
the local side (or Ascends Rockwell based chip sets but thats a seperate 
issue for Ascend owners)


		   (your CO)            (ISP CO)
modem====(analog)====SLC96----(digital)---SLC96---(digital)----Max
		^			^
		Here is the problem	|
					|				
					Not here

Bell Atlantic has a huge installed base of SLC cabinets in just 
about every Central Office, even if the ISP/NSP avoid SLC 
analog-digital converstion limitations entirely by using digital handoff 
modems, the calling end will still run into troubles at the local CO.

>haven't had time to really investigate yet but, after reading this
>discussion, and knowing that our PRI's are running through a SLC96 at
>the Catonsville CO, I'll bet that we are suffering from the same
>disease as Digex (Bell Altlanticosis).  We are planning to have a
>meeting with BA in the next few weeks to discuss this and other issues
>- but as Doug already knows - that's rather like banging your head
>against a concrete wall.

There is no wall, its simple economics.  Bell Atlantic and the equipment 
manufactures new the limitations of analog comunications many years ago. 
In response they developed a %100 digital solution called ISDN. 
At the same time they spec'd out analog communication devices to a max of 
around 4000Hz (or 3500Hz for SLC's which at the time was far beyond 
anyones limitations) and invested heavily in both specs for over a 
decade installing a huge base of analog and digital infrastructure.

So - if you want to go fast, use ISDN.  The reality is Bell Atlantic 
does not have billions to spend to upgrade analog communications when a 
better solution allready exists and is in place.  We just happen to be in 
a gray period when ISDN cant carry its self for lack of market share, and 
analog communications has reached a point of bandwidth saturation. 
Sometime in 1996 there will be flat rate ISDN the price of which will be 
pushed in part by the cable companies entry into the marketplace and 
increased CAP presence.  It will be a buyers market in comparison to the 
current 1-Company Federal regulatory system.

/stb

p.s. - Bell Atlantic is not a monopoly in the true sense of the word, you 
can buy high-quality, equally connected local telephone service from other 
companies right now today at a cheaper rate then Bell Atlantic -- although
with limited geographic termination points due to the recent entry into 
the market for the CAP's.
-- 
---
Stephen Balbach  "Driving the Internet to Work"
VP, ClarkNet     due to the high volume of mail I receive please quote
info@clark.net   the full original message in your reply.