Re: (PM) Two weeks later, and still no working ComOS

Florian Lohoff (flo@mini.gt.owl.de)
Sat, 18 Jul 1998 17:06:58 +0200

On Fri, Jul 17, 1998 at 07:54:12PM -0000, Mia's Virtual Post Office wrote:
> Matt said on 7/18/98 3:45 PM
>
> >
> >I hate when mailing lists turn into this. The PM3 is a great terminal
> >server. The only problem is that Livingston is always like 6 months
> >behind Ascend and 3Com when it comes to 56k technology.
>
>
> (Livingston)6months behind, and make good code, vs. Jump the gun and
> make crap(USR)

I have the direct comparison at work with Ascend Max 4000/TNT, USR TC (HiPER
and old Quad/NetServer) and i got a PM3 for doing some hobby ISP things.

3COM/USR has by FAR the BEST modem code. I dont like their E1/NetS/NMC/Modem
splitting but the HiPerArc and HiPerDSP are great.

Ascend has the best configuration/code management for big networks.
RADIUS configuration for DIALOUT location on reboot and/or request.
Easy configuration dumping/restoring via TFTP... I get a replacement
box up and running in <5 Minutes with ALL configurations etc. They
have known performance problems at 4xE1 on a 4000 so you may only
put 2 on it (TNT has similar problems).

The PM3 is a small handy thing and in comparison is very cheap. The
ComOS needs a complete redesign to keep up with current NetWorkManagement
needs (Remote configuration etc) but the modem code seems to be the worsest
of all the above.

BTW: USR has the same problem currently with support for the old NetServer.
No feature requests and bugfixes get through same with the PM3 currently.
So i think ill go for an used Max4k.

Flo

-- 
Florian Lohoff		flo@mini.gt.owl.de      	+49-5241-470566
-
To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>