It was just an example. Another would be allowing some ISDN customers to
use compression and not others (and charge extra for the priviledge).
There is a big difference in potential bandwidth usage between 2
B-channels no compression and 2 B-channels with compression.
By the way, a fast Windows 95 machine using STAC has the potential to use
20 to 30 percent more bandwidth than a fast Windows 95 machine using
v.42bis.
I don't know about the rest of you out there, but bandwidth used by a
customer is a major factor in determining what I charge for an account.
Scott Winders
winders@netgate.net
On Thu, 20 Nov 1997, Scooter wrote:
> At 03:04 PM 11/20/97 -0800, you wrote:
> >
> >You're right. But this is a major oversight. An ISP is forced to support
> >compression for all connections on a PM3 if the card is installed. What
> >if an ISP would like to charge extra for compression on ISDN connections
> >and not offer it at all on async connections? He can't! It is an all or
> >nothing deal. Big oversight as far as I am concerned. I have an RFE in on
> >this already...
> >
> >Scott Winders
> >winders@netgate.net
> >
>
> Why do you care if an analog customer uses STAC vs. V.42bis ?
>
> Scooter
>
-
To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.