Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!orstcs!ogccse!husc6!spdcc!eli
From: eli@spdcc.COM (Steve Elias)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans
Subject: Re: broadband high speed networking between buildings
Message-ID: <4624@ursa-major.SPDCC.COM>
Date: 20 Sep 89 14:55:33 GMT
References: <4616@ursa-major.SPDCC.COM> <19691@mimsy.UUCP>
Reply-To: eli@ursa-major.spdcc.COM (Steve Elias)
Lines: 39

In article <19691@mimsy.UUCP> chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) writes:
>>In article <19661@mimsy.UUCP> I wrote:
>>>broadband is slow.
>
>In article <4616@ursa-major.SPDCC.COM> eli@spdcc.COM (Steve Elias) writes:
>>wrong.  10 Mbits/sec is not "slow", by today's standards.
>
>By *whose* standards?

	99 44/100 % of networks out there are 10 Mbps or slower.
	that's my criterion for saying that 10 Mbps is not slow by
	today's standards.

>>... it is rare to see a network which pushes the limits of
>>a 10 Mbits/sec ethernet, you know!
>
>Rare for you, perhaps.

	i contend it is rare among that 99 44/100 % of networks that
	i mention above.  please pardon mon affaire if you
	think my concept of "rarity" doesn't match yours.

>10 Mbps is thus a recipe for bottlenecks: today, when fusing two LANs into
>one, and tomorrow, as a LAN itself.  (Good thing FDDI still looks
>promising.)

	i agree that we are cooking a recipe for bottlenecks -- in that
	sense, 10 Mbps is slow.  by the same token (should i plug token
	bus as a backbone network, here?), you will be able to call FDDI
	"slow" in a few years, when processing and data xfer requirements
	advance to the point where FDDI backbones are overtaxed... you
	can always call current technology "slow", but if everyone's running
	at the same "slowness", then they aren't "slow" relatively.
	semantics, right?

-- 
 ... Steve Elias (eli@spdcc.com);6178906844;6179325598; {}
/* free email to fax gateway for destinations in metro Boston area. */
/* send email and the destination fax number... */