Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!elroy!peregrine!zardoz!conexch!turnkey!stanton!donegan
From: donegan@stanton.TCC.COM (Steven P. Donegan)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans
Subject: Re: ACC ethernet bridge
Summary: ACC 4030 - A good choice
Message-ID: <73@stanton.TCC.COM>
Date: 19 Jul 88 02:10:13 GMT
References: <3380@phri.UUCP>
Organization: Stanton Public Domain Systems, Stanton, Ca.
Lines: 25


At Western Digital I have used (and are still using):

Vitalink Translan I
Bridge Communications IB/3
ACC 4030

Remote bridges. All function well, have been very reliable and all come with
network management software. After using these bridges for quite a while I
will suggest that the basic rule of thumb for bridges (transparent MAC level)
at my site is:

128k or less inter-bridge link - use ACC
T1 or faster use Bridge Communications IB/3

I do not suggest using the Translan I at all. We have converted all of ours
to IB/3 units (The Translan I was based on Bridge's hardware and Vitalink
software thus posed a severe support problem from Vitalink). If anyone else
out there knows of better cost/performance units I'd appreciate some mail.
This includes vendors :-)

-- 
Steven P. Donegan                 These opinions are given on MY time, not
Sr. Telecommunications Analyst    Western Digital's
Western Digital Corp.
stanton!donegan || donegan@stanton.TCC.COM || donegan%stanton@tcc.com