![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
PenultimateHop:Ragnor:
Most ISP's are moving customers to EUBA if it's available from the exchange/cabinet they are connected to.
Really? I thought most ISPs were whining that EUBA required an architecture change on their side, and sometimes a BRAS/LNS change...
PenultimateHop:Ragnor:
Most ISP's are moving customers to EUBA if it's available from the exchange/cabinet they are connected to.
Really? I thought most ISPs were whining that EUBA required an architecture change on their side, and sometimes a BRAS/LNS change...
maverick:
Actually Ragnor this was from my home DSL connection on the Northshore in Auckland, was cabinetised last week btw finally , Cameron is getting the info from you guys to us to chase up, at this stage we don't see the issue but are looking as the results you have are a bit strange.
Ragnor: The benefit to moving far outweighs the cons of staying with the old services, notably that ethernet handover links aren't dimensioned in the same (bad) way the old atm ones are.
PenultimateHop:Ragnor: The benefit to moving far outweighs the cons of staying with the old services, notably that ethernet handover links aren't dimensioned in the same (bad) way the old atm ones are.
Oh I quite agree that EUBA is a better product all round, but the reaction I had heard from the ISPs was rather... un-excited.
Note that the Ethernet handovers (which were also available with UBS/UBA) are dimensioned very similarly to ATM handover subscribers (number of subscribers * CIR purchased and the three-month growth factor).
Ragnor: From earlier this month:
RedJalapeno:
I'm confused, is there any legitimate justification for putting artificial constraints on EUBA? Or is telecom wholesale full of sadists who like to see NZers having a terrible broadband experience?
|
![]() ![]() ![]() |