some snipping done: >Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 17:21:55 -0700 (PDT) >From: Cyclades Technical Support <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: Len Conrad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: PC400 >X-Virus-Scanned: by VirusGate.MEIway.com >X-RCPT-TO: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Hi Len, > My answers are below. >Regards, > >Al Roth > >On Mon, 15 Oct 2001, Len Conrad wrote: > > > Hi Al, > > > > ok, so the PC400 can support "clear-channel", ie, non-channelized > > operation, it seems? > > > > >These are primarily limitations in FreeBSD. > > >There are many more options available in Linux, including Frame > > >Relay support. > > > > oh, I see. It's your FreeBSD driver that isn't as sophisticated as your > > Linux driver? > >Actually, the problem is in the FreeBSD support, not the driver > > > > > You FreeBSD support for the PC400 includes FreeBSD 4.4? > > > >There currently is not a FreeBSD driver for PC400. > > > In the case where I use two or more PC400's to accept, say, 4 T1's, is > > there any outbound loadbalancing where the 4 T1's are going to the same > > upstream, who in turn is doing downstream-load balancing? This load > > balanced, multi-T1 setup seems to be the common way to go above 1.5 > > mbits/sec without going to a full or fractionalized DS3. > > > >Load balancing is an OS issue, not a driver issue. In the case of Linux >2.4.4 and greater, we are able to support MultiLink PPP, so multiple T1 >lines can be combined to increase bandwidth.
-------------------------- So they've got some FreeBSD support, but say its weaker driver is due to FreeBSD. hmmmm Len To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
