On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 16:32:14 PDT, Josh Richards <jrichard@cubicle.net> said:
* Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu> [20010612 13:03]:
Umm.. don't bother. Let's think this through. 2Mbits/sec of bandwidth will only sustain about 40 56KB modems doing a simultaneous download.
You've got an interesting view of the $20/mo. retail dial-up market economics. Very few access providers have end-users on dial-up with such thriving Internet habits (though each access providers' customer base differs).
OK.. I'll admit it - personal viewpoint *may* be a bit slanted, we've been just a bit ahead of the curve - bev.net launched about a decade ago across the hall from my office. http://www.bev.net/project/brochures/about.html The local people are on-line, big-time, real-time, all the time. At least locally, we need to over-provision compared to what a lot of other people are reporting.
Even adding in think time and the like, a /24 should be plenty wide enough.
I can't contest this since the original poster provided insufficient information. A single /24 happens to be a default for some providers of T1
Well.. the question was how much space to sell to *another ISP*. Now, we've seen several numbers that all seem to agree that several racks of modems will saturate the 2Mb link to the customer ISP for a /24 or maybe a /23 worth of dialup modem pool space. If the new startup ISP is providing colocation, expect that either they have colocated a lot of idle hardware, or that they'll saturate their 2Mb even faster. I'd expect a /24 worth of webservers should saturate an uplink even faster than a /24 worth of terminal servers.
You've apparently not paid much attention to how this industry got started have you? Though, they will need the luck...I'll grant you that... :-)
I *was* paying attention - I was there. ;) Just some days I forget there's people still trying to climb onto the bandwagon we're desperately trying to get *off*. ;) -- Valdis Kletnieks Operating Systems Analyst Virginia Tech