Re: (ASCEND) Inter operability & BACP,DBA,BOD et. al. (fwd)

[MegaZone <megazone@livingston.com>]

Once upon a time Kevin Smith shaped the electrons to say...
>>And it is needless overhead since it is hard to have a simple setting that
>>says "oh, bring up the second channel if the traffic reaches level X".
>So here you vote NO, and...

My personal opinion as an engineer is that is is not needed.

>>Yes, I think we should do BACP too.  But I think it is wasteful for most
>>applications.
>...YES. Are you running for Governor or something ;) ?

My opinion as a *realist* is that customers still shop with checklists
and they are looking for BACP.  And from a business perspective I think we
need to do it to interoperate.  Like it or not, the Pipeline IS a dominant
SOHO box and people want to dial into PortMasters on the headend.

We'll still work on getting them to buy ORs instead of course. ;-)

-MZ
--
Livingston Enterprises - Chair, Department of Interstitial Affairs
Phone: 800-458-9966 510-737-2100 FAX: 510-737-2110 megazone@livingston.com
For support requests: support@livingston.com  <http://www.livingston.com/> 
Snail mail: 4464 Willow Road, Pleasanton, CA 94588
++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe:	send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd:	<http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>

---

• Prev by Date: Re: (ASCEND) 32HDLC card
• Next by Date: (ASCEND) P75 hash codes?
• Prev by thread: Re: (ASCEND) Inter operability & BACP,DBA,BOD et. al. (fwd)
• Next by thread: (ASCEND) Multi-IP NAT (fwd)
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread