nanog mailing list archives
Re: low-latency bandwidth for cheap?
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike () swm pp se>
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 21:13:37 +0200 (CEST)
On Fri, 6 Aug 2004, Dan Hollis wrote:
If you want low-latency you dont use ADSL. My SDSL connection: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 2.454/2.544/6.587/0.187 ms
I guess this is because it uses flame delay instead of ATM? If it wasn't for ADSL and g.SHDSL I guess nobody would still use ATM? Let's hope the VDSL guys sort out their range problems (5.5km) so we can all get on with our lives without ever using ATM again. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike () swm pp se
Current thread:
- Re: low-latency bandwidth for cheap?, (continued)
- Re: low-latency bandwidth for cheap? Wes Mills (Aug 04)
- Re: low-latency bandwidth for cheap? Deepak Jain (Aug 04)
- Re: low-latency bandwidth for cheap? Jeff Cole (Aug 04)
- Re: low-latency bandwidth for cheap? Mikael Abrahamsson (Aug 04)
- Re: low-latency bandwidth for cheap? Randy Bush (Aug 05)
- Re: low-latency bandwidth for cheap? Mikael Abrahamsson (Aug 05)
- Re: low-latency bandwidth for cheap? John Lyons (Aug 06)
- Re: low-latency bandwidth for cheap? Sam Stickland (Aug 06)
- Re: low-latency bandwidth for cheap? Arnold Nipper (Aug 06)
- Re: low-latency bandwidth for cheap? Dan Hollis (Aug 06)
- Re: low-latency bandwidth for cheap? Mikael Abrahamsson (Aug 06)
- Re: low-latency bandwidth for cheap? Arnold Nipper (Aug 06)
- Re: low-latency bandwidth for cheap? Randy Bush (Aug 05)