|
Grex > Coop8 > #134: Should Grex get a T1 connection? | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 22 new of 146 responses total. |
srw
|
|
response 125 of 146:
| 
Nov 19 08:07 UTC 1996 |
I agree that the initial equipment costs could decide this.
On the fractional T1 question. It has been my understanding for some time now,
that the phone company costs are the same for any fractional T1 as they are
for the whole thing.
The purpose of a fractional T1 would be a lower cost for the routing of
packets. Since this portion would be donated at the full T1 level, a
fractional T1 would make no sense in this case.
|
chelsea
|
|
response 126 of 146:
|
Nov 19 13:05 UTC 1996 |
Is the ISP asking anything of Grex in return for
their generous offer?
|
steve
|
|
response 127 of 146:
|
Nov 19 14:48 UTC 1996 |
Nope. (else I don't think folks would have been interested.)
We're paying for the copper in this propsed project--a fractional
T1 uses the same lines as a full T1, so there are no cost savings
possible unless we went through several CO's. Then we could get something
of a discount, but that doesn't apply to us.
|
albaugh
|
|
response 128 of 146:
|
Nov 19 17:22 UTC 1996 |
Please cure my ignorance: "T1" means "fast" to most people. But does it
imply certain physical connectivity requirements? E.g. could T1 run over
optical as well as copper? Would it in fact be something faster, e.g. "T2"?
|
ajax
|
|
response 129 of 146:
|
Nov 19 17:39 UTC 1996 |
Re 127, bummer that there's no discount, though I guess it's good that
both ends are served by the same CO, or the price would only be higher.
I was thinking there might be tariff savings even within the same CO, but
I guess tariffs don't apply, or aren't bandwidth-related, in this case.
T1 lines run over two twisted pairs of copper wires. You could get
the same speed (and a lot faster) over fiber, but then it wouldn't be
a T1 line. A T1 combines 24 64K (or DS0) channels, called a DS1, while
a T3 combines 28 1544K (or DS1) channels. I'd guess T3s use fiber, but
I don't know. Oddly, I've never heard of a T2.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 130 of 146:
|
Nov 19 17:53 UTC 1996 |
I'm still trying to contact our person at this ISP, with no luck. I'm
concerned.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 131 of 146:
|
Nov 19 19:48 UTC 1996 |
I reached our person at the ISP. Evidently it's no big deal to run an
ethernet cable to Grex if Grex is located in the same building as them. But
it'll cost something like $4000 for equipment to connect a telco T1 to their
equipment. He's checking into a possibility of 128K ISDN. Also, I asked if
it would be possible for Grex to put a PC router at their location, connected
to their ethernet on one side, and to a telco T1 connection, maintained by
Grex, on the other. He's looking into it, but not sure they'll go for it.
|
steve
|
|
response 132 of 146:
|
Nov 19 20:33 UTC 1996 |
I've asked about some other options, too. They probably won't work
out, so ISDN looks more like what we'll be able to jump to. Even 128K
is going to be a LOT faster than what we have now.
|
ajax
|
|
response 133 of 146:
|
Nov 19 21:52 UTC 1996 |
$4000 sounds like a brand new high-end router and CSU/DSU. If we
could maintain our own routers and CSU/DSUs on both ends, I think we
could do it for around $1200 in equipment.
STeve and scg sound confident that ISDN is now an option. It didn't
seem to be one when a T1 looked more viable (e.g. scg's response #16).
Has new information become available?
|
steve
|
|
response 134 of 146:
|
Nov 20 02:03 UTC 1996 |
Heh. Things are still in a state of flux. We're working on all
the options; the goal is to get a more reasonable net connection.
|
kaplan
|
|
response 135 of 146:
|
Nov 20 14:26 UTC 1996 |
If we're only going to upgrade to 128K, would it make sense to keep the 28.8K
connection? Maybe the faster link could be used for itneractive traffic and
mail could be routed over the existing one?
|
dang
|
|
response 136 of 146:
|
Nov 20 16:22 UTC 1996 |
The problem with that, as I remember it, is that IC Net would not like
it if we got a faster connection somewhere else, and would stop donating
the 28.8. Do I have that right?
|
robh
|
|
response 137 of 146:
|
Nov 20 16:36 UTC 1996 |
That is my understanding, yes.
|
ajax
|
|
response 138 of 146:
|
Nov 20 18:16 UTC 1996 |
Re 134, I guess I misinterpreted the certainty of your verb tenses ("128K
*is* going to be a lot faster....") It sounded rather definite! :-)
Has IC-Net been asked if they'd donate a 128K ISDN link?
One potential hitch with ISDN, if it's from the place that wants $4000
for T1 equipment, is that equivalent ISDN equipment could cost nearly as
much. (For example, if they want a new dedicated Cisco router for ISDN).
|
scg
|
|
response 139 of 146:
|
Nov 20 19:12 UTC 1996 |
The person at the ISP who was trying to get a T1 for Grex has a T1 going to
his house. The thing he's working on at the moment is getting an ISDN
connection from Grex to his house, not from Grex to the ISP. In that case,
it would be our equipment on both ends, and our lines on both ends.
|
dpc
|
|
response 140 of 146:
|
Nov 22 01:28 UTC 1996 |
So as you saying we'd need to buy $4000 worth of equipment for the ISDN
or the T1? Sorry if I'm confused.
|
janc
|
|
response 141 of 146:
|
Nov 22 03:50 UTC 1996 |
The thumbnail guestimates made at the board meeting suggested that with the
ISDN option now being considered, the up-front cost would be in the (very
rough) neighborhood of $1200. The $4000 was CICnet's cost for a T1, to which
we would have to add another $1500 for our equipment. I think that that
particular version of the T1 scheme isn't even seriously on the table. The
last surviving T1 scheme would be an attempt to bypass that. It looks like
the climate is against any flavor of T1, but that a 128K ISDN is a real
possibility.
|
ajax
|
|
response 142 of 146:
|
Nov 22 05:47 UTC 1996 |
Re 140, I was suggesting earlier that you could theoretically spend
$4000 on ISDN equipment the same way you can spend it on T1 equipment.
The current approach wouldn't limit our hardware choices (at least not
nearly as much), so we wouldn't spend that much for ISDN equipment.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 143 of 146:
|
Nov 22 18:48 UTC 1996 |
At the board meeting, a number of board members (including me) said that they
had been uncomfortable about the huge amount of money the T1 connection would
have cost. The price of the 128K ISDN connection is much more within Grex's
financial reach.
|
krj
|
|
response 144 of 146:
|
Nov 22 18:57 UTC 1996 |
If we are backing away from the T1 (*sniff*) to a ISDN line,
Someone In Authority will want to discuss this with the folks who
pledged money in the Agora item. I know I'd be happy to keep my
small pledge even if we end up with just ISDN.
|
robh
|
|
response 145 of 146:
|
Nov 22 19:16 UTC 1996 |
Rest assured, if we don't get the T1, then we don't expect people
to give us the pledge money anyway. >8) I expect we'll just start
up a new item for ISDN pledges.
|
ajax
|
|
response 146 of 146:
|
Nov 22 20:14 UTC 1996 |
I'm definitely happier about the 128K ISDN possibility than the T1
possibility. The costs as proposed would maintain our comfortable
finances, with no stress about deficit reduction.
I mentioned the T1 unlikelihood in the Agora item last night. I'm
not an Authority, but I was the one who started the pledge drive, too.
The item there mentioned a couple times that no final decision had been
made. For folks who don't read Agora, about $600 or so had been pledged
toward a T1 connection.
I'm sure there will be some fund-raising efforts when an ISDN line
looks more certain. If things work out like we're hoping, the amount
needed won't be nearly as staggering, and I think a significant chunk
of the startup costs could be paid for with such an effort.
|