[178543] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: symmetric vs. asymmetric [was: Verizon Policy Statement on Net
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mike Hammett)
Sat Feb 28 12:03:29 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2015 10:59:25 -0600 (CST)
From: Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <54F1F28F.4080909@mtcc.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
20 years ago was into AOL's prime, so yes they did.
Great, let's re-evaluate the system when demand necessitates it. For many systems, it's literally as simple as changing how many channels are allocated to what directions.
By that logic, we would have been running 486s with 32 gigs of RAM because some people today use that much. *shakes head* Obviously the majority of the dissent here works with OPM.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Thomas" <mike@mtcc.com>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2015 10:53:35 AM
Subject: Re: symmetric vs. asymmetric [was: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality]
On 02/28/2015 08:20 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
> I use Skype regularly. It doesn't require 10 megabits.
>
> No, I didn't forget about them. There's simply not that many of them.
>
> No game requires significant amounts of upload.
>
> I forgot nothing and none of what you presented changes my statement in any material manner.
>
20 years ago, your standard consumer didn't use the internet either so
there definitely no business case for anything other than POTS.
Mike
