On Oct 7, 2009, at 10:52 AM, Scott Howard wrote:
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 7:16 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore
<patr...@ianai.net> wrote:
I read the article and the follow up posts and I wonder if we are
all using the same definition for "speed" here. The article seems
to imply you don't get 6 Mbps on your DSL line in summer because
the copper is hotter and it's harder to push electrons down the
link. That is clearly BS, the clock is ticking six million times
per second, period.
So you're saying that if I put in an 8Mbps ADSL1 connection, then
I'm going to get a guaranteed 8Mbps point-to-point back to the
exchange, regardless of the quality of my phone line, or the
distance from the exchange?
Yes, everyone, I was imprecise. Please tell me all about baud and
variability and such. Because that was the point I was trying to make.
That laser is blinking at 10 billion times per second whether the
queue behind the port is full or not. (And don't tell me the laser
is quiescent when the queue is empty, you know what I mean.)
Laser? Perhaps this is a different type of ADSL than most people
here are used to?
(I'm not saying that the article is right, but...)
I admit I totally spaced on the fact DSL != ethernet when I was typing
the first paragraph. But when I wrote the above, I actually thought
to myself: "I better mention I'm talking about a 10G backbone link...
nah, everyone on NANOG is smart enough to figure out what I meant."
End of day, the point stands that the article is worse than useless as
it does not add data to the general knowledge pool, but actually makes
everyone dumber for reading it. Apparently it even made me forget how
DSL works....
--
TTFN,
patrick
