nanog mailing list archives
Re: Standards for last mile performance
From: Josh Reynolds <josh () kyneticwifi com>
Date: Sun, 1 May 2016 10:02:01 -0500
Disagreeing is okay. It wouldn't make you any less wrong though :P On May 1, 2016 3:58 AM, "Mark Tinka" <mark.tinka () seacom mu> wrote:
On 1/May/16 10:55, Josh Reynolds wrote:No. Active has higher initial and ongoing plant costs (cabinet power, cabinet wear and tear, more battery banks, chargers, etc). You also end up using far, far less fiber strands.I tend to disagree, but this is one of those debates that could go on forever... Lord knows I've been having it since 2008. Mark.
Current thread:
- Re: Standards for last mile performance Mark Tinka (May 01)
- Re: Standards for last mile performance Josh Reynolds (May 01)
- Re: Standards for last mile performance Mark Tinka (May 01)
- Re: Standards for last mile performance Josh Reynolds (May 01)
- Re: Standards for last mile performance Eric Kuhnke (May 02)
- Re: Standards for last mile performance Mark Tinka (May 01)
- Re: Standards for last mile performance Josh Reynolds (May 01)
- Re: Standards for last mile performance Josh Reynolds (May 01)