That's a somewhat loaded statement I think. Of course it's the <br>
case that with a clogged server no one does much better than<br>
anyone else. But even there, I see no particular reason why<br>
DSL should have an inherent advantage over cable mdem.<br>
<br>
<br>
I am particularly lucky right now in that in my particular area I rarely<br>
see any loading effect. I get pretty much the 8Mbps/800Kbps any<br>
time of the day, and any day of the week, to my hosting service.<br>
But of course that can't apply to servers, which might also have time<br>
of day effects, or day of the week effects. DSL has a dedicated <br>
connection from the CO to you, but that's far as it goes up the line.<br>
A well balanced cable branch should do just as well, albeit the<br>
cable companies often sell more capacity than they actually have <br>
on a branch, and then hunker down until enough people scream,<br>
or threaten to move to DSL. ( Once again the beauty of competition. )<br>
<br>
<br>
Anyway, to the extent I am able to test things, I get the cable bandwidth<br>
I pay for. I had DSL three years ago, and it was still expensive for what<br>
I got, which is why I switched. I'm sure the bang for the buck ration has<br>
improved a lot since then. But I still can't see any technical reason why<br>
DSL should perform better per unit of bandwidth over a broad range of <br>
situations. And in my experience it doesn't. I have done things like <br>
tweak input buffer sizes, trying to optimize transfer rates, and settled on<br>
32K. It's not a sharp peak, but can reduce packet overhead a little bit.<br>
But this has little to do with DSL versus cable modem.<br>
<br>
<br>
The only big effect I've ever seen is between windoz and Linux. Linux<br>
simply performs better - maybe 10%. I attribute that simply to Linux being<br>
a better implementation of the protocol stack. But again has little to do<br>
with DSL versus cable modem.<br>
<br>
<br>
If anyone out there has any measured numbers on this I would be <br>
interested to see what I am missing. But having been in both camps,<br>
the only thing that would get me away from the speed of cable modem<br>
would be an overwhelming cost/performance advantage for DSL. As much<br>
as I use my computers each day, bandwidth and performance are worth<br>
a lot to me, and it will be a tough sell. DSL could improve it's speed a<br>
lot of the telcos want to spend the money for system upgrades, but I'll <br>
wait until I see it. For now the speed is worth more than the cost difference.<br>
<br>
<br>
-Bob<br>
<br><br><p><DEFANGED_div><DEFANGED_span class="gmail_quote">On 4/30/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Joshua Burns</b> <<a href="mailto:joshuadburns@hotmail.com">joshuadburns@hotmail.com</a>> wrote:</DEFANGED_span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" DEFANGED_style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Good question. In fact I just spent the last hour trying to back up what I<br>said with a web site or two but can't find anything. The only place I can<br>find that information is in a book of mine from ITT Technical Institute,
<br>"Network Standards and Protocols," which states Cable only supports around<br>60 concurrent connections or so, while DSL is generally a couple hundred.<br>We'll keep in mijnd however that these books have been published by NIIT and
<br>therefore have absolutely no firm standing on factual information.<br><br>I do however stand by my statement that even though my friend can run a<br>bandwidth test and get around a 7.5 mb connection, I can still generally
<br>download files via peer to peer networks close to the same speed he can.<br><br>Josh<br><br><br>>From: "Tim Schmidt" <<a href="mailto:timschmidt@gmail.com">timschmidt@gmail.com</a>><br>>Reply-To:
<a href="mailto:grlug@grlug.org">grlug@grlug.org</a><br>>To: <a href="mailto:grlug@grlug.org">grlug@grlug.org</a><br>>Subject: Re: [GRLUG] core 5 iso image?<br>>Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 02:06:25 -0400<br>><br>>On 4/30/06, Joshua Burns <
<a href="mailto:joshuadburns@hotmail.com">joshuadburns@hotmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>> > Well something you also must consider is whether or not you're using<br>>cable.<br>> > If you are, keep in mind you are only allowed so a low number of
<br>> > simultaneous connections while with T1/3 or DSL, this number is much<br>>larger.<br>> > Being that peer to peer networks require many, many connections, using<br>>cable<br>> > will be a sure down fall.
<br>> ><br>> > I have a friend who has 8 Megabit cable while I myself have 1.5 DSL. I<br>>still<br>> > download things nearly as fast as he does, simply because if you were to<br>> > monitor the amount of concurrent connections, you'd see my connection
<br>>has a<br>> > lot more actively downloading, and less being choked, while his is the<br>> > opposite.<br>><br>>What's the reasoning behind this? As far as I understand, the number<br>>of concurrent connections you can handle has everything to do with the
<br>>computer making the connections, and possibly the routers in between<br>>the connections (including your personal router if you have one, and<br>>the ISPs), but absolutely nothing to do with the medium carrying the
<br>>packets. So explain why cable would be any different than DSL of a<br>>similar throughput?<br>><br>>--tim<br>>_______________________________________________<br>>grlug mailing list<br>><a href="mailto:grlug@grlug.org">
grlug@grlug.org</a><br>><a href="http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug">http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug</a><br><br>_________________________________________________________________
<br>Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee®<br>Security. <a href="http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963">http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963</a><br>
<br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>grlug mailing list<br><a href="mailto:grlug@grlug.org">grlug@grlug.org</a><br><a href="http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug">http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug
</a><br><br></blockquote></p><DEFANGED_div><br>