Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/19/2017 7:27:10 PM
Posted: 4/15/2002 11:41:16 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/15/2002 11:46:23 AM EDT by Joe_Blacke]
Having your boss pay for a 10Mb Business connection, with a cable modem and router for your home network. On top of that, I get to deduct the cost of the new PC I just built, and the square footage of my den when I file my taxes. All so I can TELECOMMUTE. Man, when life sucks, it really sucks. Guess I'll have to learn to live with it.[smoke]
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 11:54:21 AM EDT
It must be really frustrating when AR15.com runs slow then. Kinda like having a 900hp hemi with 4 flat tires. [:D]
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 12:10:08 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/15/2002 12:14:21 PM EDT by ron97ws6]
Originally Posted By Joe_Blacke: Having your boss pay for a 10Mb Business connection, with a cable modem and router for your home network.
View Quote
Uhmmm. By definition, [i]that [b]is[/b] broadband. [/i] Broadband is any connection above 128k. Nice deal though. Now, I have a broadband connection. Where I work [i]is[/i] my ISP. I have a Windows 2000 Server, on a rack in the house running IIS 5.0, Exchange 2000, and ISA server for my own web and email. So there! [:P]
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 12:22:59 PM EDT
I've got broadband also. I spend so much time on this slow site that I thought something was wrong. As soon as I leave this site everything speeds up. Wheres those upgrades Goatboy? [;)]
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 12:25:09 PM EDT
What could be more fun than an OC-1 network card?
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 12:30:57 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/15/2002 12:49:42 PM EDT by Joe_Blacke]
Originally Posted By ron97ws6:
Originally Posted By Joe_Blacke: Having your boss pay for a 10Mb Business connection, with a cable modem and router for your home network.
View Quote
Uhmmm. By definition, [i]that [b]is[/b] broadband. [/i] Broadband is any connection above 128k. Nice deal though. Now, I have a broadband connection. Where I work [i]is[/i] my ISP. I have a Windows 2000 Server, on a rack in the house running IIS 5.0, Exchange 2000, and ISA server for my own web and email. So there! [:P]
View Quote
Actually the difference between broadband and baseband is they type of signalling used, not speed. I wouldn't agree that my LAN running on 100BastTX (100Mb) is actually broadband, just because it is above 128k. Baseband, and other multiple access technologies such as ethernet (10/100 base T/X), is where a single signal uses up the entire available bandwith during transmission. Broadband is a different technology where multiple signals can use different parts of the available bandwith simultaneously, usually through the use of a multiplexer. Signals that travel at different frequencies can be transmitted on the same wire, as well as signals that use the SAME frequencies can be transmitted on the same wire as long as they are timmed so that they are out of phase of one another. Now, I let my employeer worry about hosting Exchange and Web support. I trouble shoot it too much at work to want to have to worry about it at home on my personal machine. Besides, I don't want SMTP traffic, or HTTP/S traffic slowing down my throughput.
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 12:34:56 PM EDT
Originally Posted By urodoji: What could be more fun than an OC-1 network card?
View Quote
Maybe 2 OC-1 network cards? [BD] the_reject
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 12:43:42 PM EDT
I'm looking for an OC-192 card.
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 1:02:23 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Joe_Blacke: Actually the difference between broadband and baseband is they type of signalling used, not speed. I wouldn't agree that my LAN running on 100BastTX (100Mb) is actually broadband, just because it is above 128k. Baseband, and other multiple access technologies such as ethernet (10/100 base T/X), is where a single signal uses up the entire available bandwith during transmission. Broadband is a different technology where multiple signals can use different parts of the available bandwith simultaneously, usually through the use of a multiplexer. Signals that travel at different frequencies can be transmitted on the same wire, as well as signals that use the SAME frequencies can be transmitted on the same wire as long as they are timmed so that they are out of phase of one another. quote] Well, this is just because everyone with a computer thinks of "broadband" as 'fast'. They have no idea about the use of frequencies in the carrier. Being an EE, I understand the difference... at first "bandwidth" mentioned by a computer nerd annoyed me, but it's just a decent way to describe it... oh well. Not technically accurate, but it'll do!
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 1:21:47 PM EDT
Originally Posted By AR15FENCER: at first "bandwidth" mentioned by a computer nerd annoyed me, but it's just a decent way to describe it... oh well.
View Quote
Nerd? Nerd???? That's it. Meet me behind the science building after math class (but before the chess club meeting) for a royal thrashing. Just no shots to the head, okay, because I'm all out of tape for my glasses. You only wish you were as cool as me. Mom said so. Nerd....oh come on now. That's just mean.
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 1:35:31 PM EDT
Hey!! Congrats! It is about time that job pays off!
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 1:35:38 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Joe_Blacke:
Originally Posted By AR15FENCER: at first "bandwidth" mentioned by a computer nerd annoyed me, but it's just a decent way to describe it... oh well.
View Quote
Nerd? Nerd???? That's it. Meet me behind the science building after math class (but before the chess club meeting) for a royal thrashing. Just no shots to the head, okay, because I'm all out of tape for my glasses. You only wish you were as cool as me. Mom said so. Nerd....oh come on now. That's just mean.
View Quote
hey dude... I couldn't beat 'em... so I joined them. I'm a certified computer nerd myself. Thus I can be easy with the incorrect use of the term 'bandwidth'. BTW, my daddy could kick your daddy's a$$! :p
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 1:47:04 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Guzzler: Hey!! Congrats! It is about time that job pays off!
View Quote
Hey Guzzler! How ya been? Dude, this job is the schiznit. I don't do crap all day long, and they keep throwing me a bunch of benefits. I think they are trying to keep me calm so I don't go postal or something. Drop me a line or something. Maybe we'll hook up for some 'shootin.
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 1:54:00 PM EDT
Originally Posted By AR15FENCER: hey dude... I couldn't beat 'em... so I joined them. I'm a certified computer nerd myself. Thus I can be easy with the incorrect use of the term 'bandwidth'. BTW, my daddy could kick your daddy's a$$! :p
View Quote
So, your'e a memeber of the "pocket protector club". Sorry, I didn't see your membership ID when you posted. It's gonna make it tough for me when I have to wale on you, though. Being a member of the same gang and all....
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 1:55:07 PM EDT
Joe, you beat me to it (correcting them) Nothing currently *in production* beats an OC-192 (10 Gbps = 6,476 times faster than ADSL or T1.). Then again, there is no real point in going above OC-48 (2.5 Gbps = 1,619 times faster than ADSL or T1.) as most of the backbone of the internet is OC-48 or slower. In some areas, it could even be OC-12 (622 Mbps = 402 times faster than ADSL or T1). There is only one area that they are even begining to lay OC-192 backbone and that is in New England. If you are accessing a site overseas, it'll run even slower as most of the morons in Europe have yet to discover that ISDN is not that fast (144 Kbps = 91% slower than ADSL or T1 not even calculating in the time required to Dial IN (nominal)) which is only slightly faster than a Shotgun Modem (2-56Kbps Modems built together as one unit = 112 Kbps Uplink/106 Kbps Downlink). I doubt very many people in Europe are even begining to use E-1 (2.048 Mbps = 1.32 times the speed of of ADSL or T1.) Many US Web sites are still languishing behind a T1 Line which is carrying all the internet traffic for that company. Why ? Because T3 (44.736 Mbps) is f'in expensive ($10,000/month)and don't even look at the price of a minimal OC line ($100,000/month or more) I find that most of the time that web sites are slower than my connection. When I am downloading 1 file from most sites I usually don't even get T1 Speeds (1.54 Mbps). But, when I am downloading several files at a time from multiple sites I have achieved speeds greater than T1 (3-6 Mbps). This is because my ISP uses OC-12 for their backbone to their provider.
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 2:02:39 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Joe_Blacke: Actually the difference between broadband and baseband. . . . etc
View Quote
You are getting too technical for a gun site forum. You were talking about an Internet connection at home, and your audience here is mostly comprised by typical end users. Broadband in the context of the internet is most often used to refer to bandwidth. Simply, most ISP's regard broadband as a PC based internet connection characterized by persistent ('always-on') connectivity, and connection speeds of 256 kilobits per second and higher in the downstream. The US Federal Communications Commission when referring to the internet regards broadband as 200kbps or more in at least one direction. That is a good enough definition for this forum?!! [:)]
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 2:15:17 PM EDT
Wow, and to think I thought I was kicking A$$ with my 1MB cable! Well, even with that, many sites don't keep up with me. [>(]
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 2:47:11 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ron97ws6: You are getting too technical for a gun site forum. You were talking about an Internet connection at home, and your audience here is mostly comprised by typical end users. Broadband in the context of the internet is most often used to refer to bandwidth.
View Quote
Horsepuckey. Do you allow people to refer to magazines as "clips". Do you call the AR15 rifle an "Assault Rifle". You said that Broadband is ANY connection above 128k. Regardless of how you choose to "look" at it, or what the common vernacular implies, the correct definition of broadband doesn't relate to speed, but instead is defined by signaling technologies. I didn't try to get "technical". You did. My reference to "what beats a high speed broadband connection" is that my employeer pays for it. That sure as heck beats me paying for it. You somehow assummed that I was implying that a 10Mb connection via a cable carrier isn't broadband. It is. Because you can receive a cable signal, as well as simultaneous internet traffic over the same medium, you MUST use some type of broadband connection. Hence, my definition.
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 2:54:03 PM EDT
What beats a highspeed broadband connection? A hummer from Sylvia Saint. Any day. Any time. Any where. Period. Hey, you asked. WL [:D]
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 3:00:28 PM EDT
Originally Posted By cc48510: Many US Web sites are still languishing behind a T1 Line which is carrying all the internet traffic for that company. Why ? Because T3 (44.736 Mbps) is f'in expensive ($10,000/month)and don't even look at the price of a minimal OC line ($100,000/month or more)
View Quote
My entire 60 person office uses a shared 384K fractional T1 we pay through the nose for. I just found out that business DSL is available in our area, and I'm going to try to justify it as a cost savings/network improvement. Most of our mission critical network stuff is in Germany anyway, so it's not like DSL reliability will be an issue. Wish me luck. [:D]
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 3:01:14 PM EDT
Aw quit your whining. What are you running for a PC- a Cray 5? Deepblue? Gimme a break.... that PC/ server you think is fast can't even push 10MB out the bus if it had DUAL NICs! go back to whatever science club spawned your species and leave discussions of bandwidth (not speed- electrons always travel at the same speed on wire based on the nominal velocity of propagation- as expressed as a percentage of the speed of light in a vacuum) to those who have a clue!
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 3:06:37 PM EDT
What beats a high speed broadband connection? Cancun in Feb.!
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 3:08:37 PM EDT
Originally Posted By cc48510: Joe, you beat me to it (correcting them) Nothing currently *in production* beats an OC-192 (10 Gbps = 6,476 times faster than ADSL or T1.). Then again, there is no real point in going above OC-48 (2.5 Gbps = 1,619 times faster than ADSL or T1.) as most of the backbone of the internet is OC-48 or slower. In some areas, it could even be OC-12 (622 Mbps = 402 times faster than ADSL or T1). There is only one area that they are even begining to lay OC-192 backbone and that is in New England. If you are accessing a site overseas, it'll run even slower as most of the morons in Europe have yet to discover that ISDN is not that fast (144 Kbps = 91% slower than ADSL or T1 not even calculating in the time required to Dial IN (nominal)) which is only slightly faster than a Shotgun Modem (2-56Kbps Modems built together as one unit = 112 Kbps Uplink/106 Kbps Downlink). I doubt very many people in Europe are even begining to use E-1 (2.048 Mbps = 1.32 times the speed of of ADSL or T1.) Many US Web sites are still languishing behind a T1 Line which is carrying all the internet traffic for that company. Why ? Because T3 (44.736 Mbps) is f'in expensive ($10,000/month)and don't even look at the price of a minimal OC line ($100,000/month or more) I find that most of the time that web sites are slower than my connection. When I am downloading 1 file from most sites I usually don't even get T1 Speeds (1.54 Mbps). But, when I am downloading several files at a time from multiple sites I have achieved speeds greater than T1 (3-6 Mbps). This is because my ISP uses OC-12 for their backbone to their provider.
View Quote
As a Ruling Minority here in the Nerdery, there is equipment faster than OC-192, OC-768 is available, but not practical. Because of the physical limitations of receiver sensitivity, it's just not practical, and too error prone. Also, over long distances(for something this fast, across the street is long haul), PMD becomes a serious problem. The best way to get around this is to simply put multiple OC-192's on a single fiber. Light does not interfere with light, so multiple wavelengths can be transmitted over the same medium without interference. Lucent and Fujitsu both have DWDM systems capable of handling 180 and 160 OC-192's respectively. Right now, 8 and 16 color DWDM systems are most common, and up until the industry tanked, we were putting up 192 systems and optical amplifiers like they were going out of style. Working in a long distance company puts a new perspective on the high speed/low speed thing. Europe, by the way has an almost identical fiber optic standard, the cards for Nortel eqipment are marked with the American OC designator, and with the European STM designator. More on this later, we're getting ready to convert a Fujitsu OC-192 to an OC-192C. Even Fuji isn't sure if this will work yet.
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 3:12:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/15/2002 4:56:57 PM EDT by Joe_Blacke]
Originally Posted By Grock: Aw quit your whining. What are you running for a PC- a Cray 5? Deepblue? Gimme a break.... that PC/ server you think is fast can't even push 10MB out the bus if it had DUAL NICs! go back to whatever science club spawned your species and leave discussions of bandwidth (not speed- electrons always travel at the same speed on wire based on the nominal velocity of propagation- as expressed as a percentage of the speed of light in a vacuum) to those who have a clue!
View Quote
Your'e right. I would have a hard time with 10MB. That's why I said 10Mb. Just a little bit of difference to those of us who have a clue. Do you know the difference between 10MB and 10Mb? I don't recall telling you what I was running for a server at home, so how exactly would you know that I would have a problem with 10Mb. If you are such a genius, I'm sure you read, as well as understood, that I said "home network". You assummed incorrectly that this connection would be dedicated for ONE box. Could you imagine how fast of a connection I would need if I decided to throw a LAN party, while myself and my guests connected to a gaming server hosted on another home network that was also hosting a competing group of users? How about if my wife was using the connection to browse the web at the same time, while I downloaded shareware, virus and software patches, and other items to my application/file server? Besides, bandwith is irrelevant. Throughput is what matters.
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 3:18:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/15/2002 3:21:20 PM EDT by gus]
Depending on where you are (city vs country) T1's are now available for under $200 a month. T3's have also gotten cheaper lately - around $5k/month. I used to work at a major MCI hub, and they were the first big internet backbone carrier (they had the original NSF contract) and we were able to connect at well over 10Mbps. But as has already been mentioned, good luck finding any sites that run that fast. AR15FENCER - It also took me a while to give up and quit correcting people using RF terms like "bandwidth" when referring to digital signals (data rate). And BTW, MCI was installing OC192 backbone infrastructure as early as 1997. I would bet AT&T was doing it at the same time or earlier. Most of the OC 192 stuff is in the northeast.
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 3:20:32 PM EDT
Almost all new network construction is OC192 here. It's just not cost effecient to install OC-48's for long distance.
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 3:22:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/15/2002 3:25:22 PM EDT by gus]
Hell yeah, I work at a CLEC in Baltimore (AT&T division) and we're installing OC192's constantly! Even have some customers with OC48C's.
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 3:25:50 PM EDT
Originally Posted By gus: Hell, I work at a CLEC in Baltimore (AT&T division) and we're installing OC192's constantly!
View Quote
What kind of eq. are you guys putting in? We used to turn up Nortels almost exclusively, but now the company is buying Fuji's because they're cheap. Unfortunately for the lowly techs that have to deal with them, you get what you pay for.
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 3:28:21 PM EDT
I just spent $650 on satellite internet/tv.The cool part is it uploads an downloads through the dish eliminating my phone line F***!ups.The only part that bugs me is the latency issue but it has to better than beating two sticks on a hollow log to get out a signal!.Now if I could get this stuff installed............
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 3:29:36 PM EDT
Originally Posted By urodoji:
Originally Posted By gus: Hell, I work at a CLEC in Baltimore (AT&T division) and we're installing OC192's constantly!
View Quote
What kind of eq. are you guys putting in? We used to turn up Nortels almost exclusively, but now the company is buying Fuji's because they're cheap. Unfortunately for the lowly techs that have to deal with them, you get what you pay for.
View Quote
We're removing Lucent OC48's and installing Cisco ONS15544's. They have a small footprint, but the techs here hate them because they are such a pain to provision. There is no real craft port - you log on via an ethernet connection, and each unit having a different IP makes it neccessary for them to change the network settings in their laptops. Once it's completely turned up it's not too big a deal, but during the installs it drives them nuts.
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 4:25:41 PM EDT
All the people who say junk like Broadband refers to 128, 200, 256 or whatever throughput or better are wrong. To simplify, Broadband simply means that the media can carry several seperate signals at the same time. Most home broadband right now carries two seperate signals (Up and Down). These 2 signals are seperate. That means if you are running a server and users are sucking up your uplink throughput that it won't decrease the usable downlink bandwidth that you use to download. This means that I can download and upload at the same time without using the same throughput. That is why DSL many times used to be and to some degree still is 1544/128 or something similar. Thew 1544 is your downlink speed. This is the speed at which you can download. 128 is the speed at which you can upload. Some ISPs allows 1544 in both directions. But, those are still two seperate signals...hence broadband. Baseband (Ethernet, etc...) uses a single bandwidth for all communications. That means that if you are running servers and users are nailing your web server that there will be a decrease in available throughput. But, if you are using broadband, the users cannot exceed the throughput assigned to the uplink. Therefore, no matter how many users nail your server, it shouldn't have an adverse affect on your available throughput (for downloads).
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 4:26:51 PM EDT
No craft access is pretty bogus. We're mostly using Nortel equipment. I like it alot because it has a command based user interface. Most other equipment has a GUI, which is a pain because each requires its own proprietary(read really bloody expensive) software to log in. Fujitsu's are a pain to work on, no real fiber storage. Nortel MOR's make up a good chunk of the amp chains. Easy to work on and reliable, but expesnive. Siemens amplifiers are cheap, but finickey, and their alarming and such conflicts with the Fujitsu's, and Fuji wins every time. Alcatel is extremely rare, as far as transmission equipment goes. Alcatel BBDXC's, and Nortel switches. This building has about 100 OC-48's, 30 or so OC-192's, 8 or 10 op amps, 3 BBDXC's, and a couple of Nortel radios in the back.
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 4:50:57 PM EDT
Originally Posted By cc48510: All the people who say junk like Broadband refers to 128, 200, 256 or whatever throughput or better are wrong. To simplify, Broadband simply means that the media can carry several seperate signals at the same time. Most home broadband right now carries two seperate signals (Up and Down). These 2 signals are seperate. That means if you are running a server and users are sucking up your uplink throughput that it won't decrease the usable downlink bandwidth that you use to download. This means that I can download and upload at the same time without using the same throughput.
View Quote
This definition would make a full duplex 300bps modem "broadband," which I doubt is what those who created this buzzword had in mind. [:D]
Link Posted: 4/15/2002 6:03:19 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/15/2002 6:25:57 PM EDT by gus]
Originally Posted By urodoji: No craft access is pretty bogus. We're mostly using Nortel equipment. I like it alot because it has a command based user interface. Most other equipment has a GUI, which is a pain because each requires its own proprietary(read really bloody expensive) software to log in. Fujitsu's are a pain to work on, no real fiber storage. Nortel MOR's make up a good chunk of the amp chains. Easy to work on and reliable, but expesnive. Siemens amplifiers are cheap, but finickey, and their alarming and such conflicts with the Fujitsu's, and Fuji wins every time. Alcatel is extremely rare, as far as transmission equipment goes. Alcatel BBDXC's, and Nortel switches. This building has about 100 OC-48's, 30 or so OC-192's, 8 or 10 op amps, 3 BBDXC's, and a couple of Nortel radios in the back.
View Quote
I "grew up" with Nortel ADM's and switches, and we have three DMS's here. AT&T always used Lucent for obvious reasons, and Lucent transport eqpt, while not using a GUI, uses a proprietary menu driven software. Pretty archaic. At MCI we had Alcatel BBDXC's, DSC DXC's, DSC DEX-600 and Nortel DMS switches. Hell, when I started they were still using asynchronous Fujitsu 3/36 systems! Talk about lotsa fun doing restorations! You guys still have radios??? We use these little 38 Ghz jobbies (I don't even know who makes them!) for access to customers where running fiber isn't an option, but we try to avoid it! One of the last things before I left MCI was decommisioning several digital radio paths. I think they had like 3 left there when I left. SONET really changed things and we got tired of the unreliable nature of radio when we could have SONET rings instead. That and the price of fiber and eqpt started coming down. We're getting the Cisco stuff for about 1/10 the cost of Lucent, so I don't see them going back. Plus we can put 4 OC192's in a rack that used to hold 2 Lucent OC48's. Lucent failed to keep up with the times, and they are paying for it now. The one nice thing about the Cisco stuff is you talk to it with IE or Netscape - no proprietary software. And you can do keyboard commands right there in the GUI. It's actually pretty neat once it's up and running. edited because my fingers seem to have disconnected from my brain!
Link Posted: 4/16/2002 6:01:30 AM EDT
Yeah, we're decomming all that old Fujitsu stuff finally. I would like to try out the new Cisco stuff, 4 192's in that little floor space would be nice.
Link Posted: 4/16/2002 1:51:43 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Joe_Blacke: On top of that, I get to deduct . . . the square footage of my den when I file my taxes. All so I can TELECOMMUTE.
View Quote
The only prob w/ duducting your home office is that your basis is going down, and you get screwed when you sell. I work at home as well and, brother, its the only way to go! [:D]
Link Posted: 4/16/2002 2:30:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/16/2002 2:32:05 PM EDT by magnum_99]
Geeks. [:)] (I mean that Affectionately)
Top Top