LinuxSA Mailing list archives

  From: Andrew Reid <andrew.reid@plug.cx>
  To  : <isplist@adam.com.au>
  Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 21:35:47 +0930 (CST)

Re: [OT] Telstra ADSL 'Unlimited' Introduces Download Limit

John Edwards Wrote:

> There are reasons why you do want your multiple upstream connections on 
one
> router .. all of the hosts on your network are going to need a default
> route, or otherwise need to learn routes (a lot of them!) for at least a
> part of the internet from your multiple gateways. You could have a 
seperate
> router on each upstream link, but they're expensive enough as it is 
without
> having to duplicate routing tables on expensive router ram. Unless you're
> using something like HSRP, the packets are going to be needlessly routed 
by
> one of the routers anyway, only so the data can go out the other router.

For "Joe's ISP, Inc"? I don't think so. The people here are used to dealing 
with -real- bandwidth, whereas poor Joe doesn't know much more than ISDN. 

I'm wondering if we're going to see a bunch of ISPs popup using ADSL as 
their upstream connection. 'Twouldn't supprise me. We can all laugh and 
dance when their "business" goes toes up from their unrealistic and 
unsustainable pricing plans.

> Also, the cheap PC is much more likely to blow a power supply than a 
> router, but just in case, I use redundant power supply systems :)

I know. Oh, sadly, I know :-) Would Joe think of this? Nup. Joe's not going 
to be interested in the initial outlay for a Cisco with redundant power 
supplies. It's far cheaper to put together a few bits and pieces and build a 
little router.

> Unless you're doing tricks with proxies, having multiple upstreams 
announce
> for you or running 2 distinct networks with your 2 upstream links, you're
> going to want to run BGP. In Australia, that means getting a Cisco. I 
don't
> know of anyone running gated or zebra as part of a commercial backbone.

Joe's running a commercial backbone now? Sheesh, the future's not looking 
bright :-)

> Definately, although some of the newer routers can take standard SDRAM now
> :)

Ooh, that's good to hear. My heart took a few seconds to start beating again 
when I first saw pricing for router RAM :-)

> For <100mb/s links, VLANS with a decent switch will be easier to manage
> and probably cheaper than multiple interface nics.

Something tells me that an ISP the size of Joe's is neither qualified or 
physically capable of delivering such a service.

I wasn't suggesting that you and Internode throw out all your routers and 
start using Free UNIX in their place, but the point had to be made that some 
people do.

As I said, it's not always ideal, but it does provide "Ye Olde Internet Co." 
or "Joe's ISP, Inc." with a relatively workable router.

   - andrew

-- 
void signature () {
	cout << "Andrew Reid -- andrew.reid@plug.cx" << endl ;
	cout << "Cell: +61 401 946 813" << endl ;
	cout << "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur" << endl ;
}

-- 
LinuxSA WWW: http://www.linuxsa.org.au/  IRC: #linuxsa on irc.linux.org.au
To unsubscribe from the LinuxSA list:
  mail linuxsa-request@linuxsa.org.au with "unsubscribe" as the subject