|
Grex > Coop9 > #46: Notes on a meeting that may turn into a faster net connection | |
|
| Author |
Message |
valerie
|
|
Notes on a meeting that may turn into a faster net connection
| 
Jan 27 14:29 UTC 1997 |
This item has been erased.
|
| 14 responses total. |
snafu
|
|
response 1 of 14:
|
Jan 28 00:11 UTC 1997 |
Speed up telnet? I'm all for it...I don't know about everyone else, but when
I telnet from school (CHS) it's worse then dialing into an IBM 386... about
comparable to a slow 286.... That's the only time I can type faster then it
comes on screen... It'd be a boon to everyone if we could speed that up...
|
mary
|
|
response 2 of 14:
|
Jan 28 00:35 UTC 1997 |
This could be quite nice. I'd like to see the formal contract
online before the Board takes any action though. I'd especially
like to see it clearly stated that the conditions of use would
in now way allow CIC any say over the content of our conferences
or limit any service we might want to offer for free.
|
russ
|
|
response 3 of 14:
|
Jan 28 00:53 UTC 1997 |
I hate to sound like Craig Plesco, but is this desirable if the net
effect is to turn Grex into a brief layover spot for migratory net
surfers, and doesn't give many or *any* more people who are truly
part of the community?
|
richard
|
|
response 4 of 14:
|
Jan 28 01:04 UTC 1997 |
#3...worth considering, but a faster connection has more positives than
negatives./ A faster connection will make Grex a more desireable place to
come for regular users but it will also make it so for those coming here for
email. If this deal goes through, and grex is faster, I forsee a substantial
jump in email traffic. Maybe the partitioning and second computer will
alleviate this though .
|
danr
|
|
response 5 of 14:
|
Jan 28 01:32 UTC 1997 |
Another thing not mentioned above is the term (length) of the contract.
Are they going to guarantee this arrangement for one year? two years?
more?
|
kaplan
|
|
response 6 of 14:
|
Jan 28 06:38 UTC 1997 |
If the connection is going to be at Paul (or anyone's) house, we should bank
the money for the fees to move it elsewhere. Call it the rainy day fund.
Save money agains tthe uncirtanty.
|
russ
|
|
response 7 of 14:
|
Jan 28 10:33 UTC 1997 |
Re #4: Maybe it's time to look at some system for pushing non-local
users to use the e-mail provided by their ISPs instead of Grex, before
we're back at the link-saturation stage.
|
snafu
|
|
response 8 of 14:
|
Jan 28 22:25 UTC 1997 |
Ah.. I see your point russ... I agree, those who surf in should use their ISPs
first... However (so as not to seem hypocritical) I'd like to make the point
that some of us do both... I telnet in from school, and dial up, but IO
wouldn't want to use the school mail system... it sux...
|
arthurp
|
|
response 9 of 14:
|
Jan 30 04:28 UTC 1997 |
Would these changes affect dialups?
It sounds like the router we would be using would look like an ethernet hub
instead of a tossed together computer doing only one job, right?
Such a router would be more much more reliable I think.
Partitioning to throttle email *still* sounds like a good idea.
|
russ
|
|
response 10 of 14:
|
Jan 30 04:50 UTC 1997 |
(There are IP systems which prioritize packets according to port number.)
|
ajax
|
|
response 11 of 14:
|
Jan 30 04:59 UTC 1997 |
Re 9, yes, this type of router would be a smallish box with a few
connectors, blinking lights, and maybe a few buttons, not a PC with
monitor and keyboard and such. Configuration is typically done over
a serially- connected terminal, or over an ethernet network.
One advantage of running a router from a PC is that we have source
code to add special features, but I'm not sure that's an advantage
we're utilizing.
We're also considering a combined router and ISDN box, such as the
Ascend Pipeline 50. It would be similar to a stand-lone router, but
with an ISDN interface. There is some technical discussion about
this in the garage conference.
|
dpc
|
|
response 12 of 14:
|
Jan 31 21:48 UTC 1997 |
This sounds like a *great* idea for us! The conditions seem
quite reasonable. The teeth of the "gift horse" are in good shape.
|
jared
|
|
response 13 of 14:
|
Feb 17 03:19 UTC 1997 |
nether.net uses about 256k worth of bandwidth usually.
That includes all the machines on the ethernet, which include a staff
machine that gets a fair amount of hits, plus a few other systems..
I can point people at nether.net utilization data if they're interested.
ftp://ftp.cic.net/pub/CICNet/Network-Info/stats/graphs/UIUC-graphs/weekly/97
0202/frel.cic.net
It's connected to Ethernet 2/0 -- there are graphs for that port in the
above directory.
You shouldn't have quite as much utilization either since "joe blow"
out there on the internet can't go out and ftp anything they want from
anywhere without some sort of authentication, whereas nether.net lets
anyone go out and grab anything..
As a cicnet employee, this is an excellent deal. I'd recommend getting
a p50, and I can loan one if necessary.. (They're about $500-600 right
now, they're "cheap").
|
valerie
|
|
response 14 of 14:
|
Feb 17 06:39 UTC 1997 |
This response has been erased.
|