Internet Lines

Discussion in 'Cisco' started by ZooOYork@gmail.com, Sep 14, 2006.

  1. Guest

    Hope i am posting in the correct group if not point me in the right
    direction.

    We are looking to upgrade out data lines to the Internet. We currently
    have three independent T1 lines and are having bandwidth issues that
    may also be related to the difficulties in managing three independent
    T1 lines and our old firewall and gateway anti-virus technologies. We
    are looking to increase our bandwidth as well as a parallel project to
    replace our aging border technologies.

    We here have about 325 users and dedicate 2 full T1's to their internet
    surfing as well as ingoing and outgoing email. We have a third T1 line
    that is dedicated to our VPN to connect with our 40 or so small field
    office. I am curious the amount of bandwidth other organizations have
    as well as the number of users that supports and if this seems adequate
    for their needs. I am considering a 12Mb fractional T3 as I received a
    very good offer, but am concerned this is overkill (the necessary
    hardware for the T3 line is expensive) and I could purchase less
    bandwidth via independent T1 lines and save some money. However the
    advantage of the T3 line is that it will then be very easy to turn on
    additional bandwidth if necessary.

    Just trying to get a bit of a reality check on what others are doing.

    Thanks
    , Sep 14, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Guest

    In most of the cases - consolidated bandwitdh is always preffered. and
    its a fact that around the world now high bandwitdh interfaces like
    DS3's, T3 or E3 are provided on drasticly cheaper rates...



    wrote:
    > Hope i am posting in the correct group if not point me in the right
    > direction.
    >
    > We are looking to upgrade out data lines to the Internet. We currently
    > have three independent T1 lines and are having bandwidth issues that
    > may also be related to the difficulties in managing three independent
    > T1 lines and our old firewall and gateway anti-virus technologies. We
    > are looking to increase our bandwidth as well as a parallel project to
    > replace our aging border technologies.
    >
    > We here have about 325 users and dedicate 2 full T1's to their internet
    > surfing as well as ingoing and outgoing email. We have a third T1 line
    > that is dedicated to our VPN to connect with our 40 or so small field
    > office. I am curious the amount of bandwidth other organizations have
    > as well as the number of users that supports and if this seems adequate
    > for their needs. I am considering a 12Mb fractional T3 as I received a
    > very good offer, but am concerned this is overkill (the necessary
    > hardware for the T3 line is expensive) and I could purchase less
    > bandwidth via independent T1 lines and save some money. However the
    > advantage of the T3 line is that it will then be very easy to turn on
    > additional bandwidth if necessary.
    >
    > Just trying to get a bit of a reality check on what others are doing.
    >
    > Thanks
    , Sep 14, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. In article <>,
    <> wrote:
    >We are looking to upgrade out data lines to the Internet. We currently
    >have three independent T1 lines and are having bandwidth issues that


    >We here have about 325 users and dedicate 2 full T1's to their internet
    >surfing as well as ingoing and outgoing email. We have a third T1 line
    >that is dedicated to our VPN to connect with our 40 or so small field
    >office. I am curious the amount of bandwidth other organizations have
    >as well as the number of users that supports and if this seems adequate
    >for their needs. I am considering a 12Mb fractional T3 as I received a
    >very good offer, but am concerned this is overkill


    We vary... 175 to 250 users (but over 700 registered hosts in our tables!).
    We have a gigabit service.

    Our long term monitoring suggests that our average busy rate is
    on the order of 64 Kbps, with 5-minute peaks up to 110 or so
    but not particularily often. So, our monitoring statistics
    suggest that we wouldn't suffer unduely by having merely 128 Kbps.

    None the less, this analysis is not really detailed enough, as
    in particular it does not deal with response time. When one of
    our users interacts with an application at HQ, the response might
    be a few megabytes (e.g., web page pictures), but the user is a lot
    happier to have those squirted to them quickly (and then spend a
    bunch of 'eye time' on them) then to have to wait for them to draw
    before the 'eye time'. When the 'eye time' is included, the average
    data transfer rate is not high -- and the monitoring tools aren't
    fine-enough grained to pick out a several megabytes transfered quickly
    and then eyeballed, compared to the same number of megabytes transfered
    over 1 minute.

    There have been a couple of occasions during which our interprovincial
    link to HQ has dropped to 100 Mbit, which is still far faster than
    our measured transfer requirements -- but people notice and do grumble.


    Anyhow, check to see whether you can get "burstable fibre". That'd
    probably be a fibre with a 100 Mbit modal bandwidth, rate-shaped to
    whatever speed you are willing to pay for. If you are in a desired
    business neighbourhood, the companies might install the fibre for cheap,
    figuring to amoratize the costs over all the other nearby businesses
    they think they can sell to. There might even already be fibre loop
    running to within a couple of blocks. For one of the ISPs that
    runs to our building, we traded install costs against space: they
    put their local optical switching hub into our telecomms closet and
    didn't charge us for fibre install.


    Equipment to handle 100Base-LX is fairly inexpensive -- much less
    so than to handle T3. And the price of 20 Mb burstable might only
    be a fraction of the cost of a T3.

    One disadvantage of burstable fibre compared to T1 or T3 is that
    burstable fibre is shared at some aggregation point or other: you
    are getting a link to "the internet", whereas T1 or T3 you can
    go point-to-point. That used to make a big difference for
    multimedia, but that's been more or less eliminated by better
    compression and throwing bandwidth at the problem.

    Another disadvantage is that the rates are not necessarily symmetric;
    you might not be able to transfer outwards with burstable as quickly
    as you can receive. Rate symmetry is important for some applications
    and not important for others.
    Walter Roberson, Sep 14, 2006
    #3
  4. Scooby Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hope i am posting in the correct group if not point me in the right
    > direction.
    >
    > We are looking to upgrade out data lines to the Internet. We currently
    > have three independent T1 lines and are having bandwidth issues that
    > may also be related to the difficulties in managing three independent
    > T1 lines and our old firewall and gateway anti-virus technologies. We
    > are looking to increase our bandwidth as well as a parallel project to
    > replace our aging border technologies.
    >
    > We here have about 325 users and dedicate 2 full T1's to their internet
    > surfing as well as ingoing and outgoing email. We have a third T1 line
    > that is dedicated to our VPN to connect with our 40 or so small field
    > office. I am curious the amount of bandwidth other organizations have
    > as well as the number of users that supports and if this seems adequate
    > for their needs. I am considering a 12Mb fractional T3 as I received a
    > very good offer, but am concerned this is overkill (the necessary
    > hardware for the T3 line is expensive) and I could purchase less
    > bandwidth via independent T1 lines and save some money. However the
    > advantage of the T3 line is that it will then be very easy to turn on
    > additional bandwidth if necessary.
    >
    > Just trying to get a bit of a reality check on what others are doing.
    >
    > Thanks
    >


    If you can find a provider of Metro Ethernet/fiber, you may find that it is
    a much better solution. Walter touched on this some using the term
    "burstable fiber". However, this does not even need to be burstable - they
    might just offer a 10MB throughput, or other flavors. Just the face that
    they hand off the signal to you with fiber often makes this a good option.
    The equipment is much cheaper, more up to date and easier to maintain. The
    service will most likely be as cheap, or cheaper, than the DS3 service. The
    provider will probably offer to hand it off with copper as well (the provide
    a transceiver to convert the single mode fiber to copper) so that you don't
    need an expensive fiber port on your device.

    DS3 is a dying breed. Even if you go with that solution now, you will
    probably be finding yourself switching to the Metro E solution in the near
    future.

    Hope that helps,

    Jim
    Scooby, Sep 15, 2006
    #4
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. graeme@invalid

    Missing Lines

    graeme@invalid, Dec 31, 2004, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    509
    graeme@invalid
    Dec 31, 2004
  2. ANC
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    572
  3. a_janssen
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    2,534
    Craig
    Oct 20, 2003
  4. shailu
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    548
    shailu
    Oct 21, 2003
  5. Sens Fan Happy In Ohio

    Modems, Analog Lines and ... Electrical Lines?

    Sens Fan Happy In Ohio, Aug 5, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    1,011
Loading...

Share This Page