[189029] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Standards for last mile performance
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Josh Reynolds)
Sun May 1 11:02:05 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <f85a021d-0f24-1829-140b-505e058f138a@seacom.mu>
Date: Sun, 1 May 2016 10:02:01 -0500
From: Josh Reynolds <josh@kyneticwifi.com>
To: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Disagreeing is okay. It wouldn't make you any less wrong though :P
On May 1, 2016 3:58 AM, "Mark Tinka" <mark.tinka@seacom.mu> wrote:
>
>
> On 1/May/16 10:55, Josh Reynolds wrote:
>
> > No. Active has higher initial and ongoing plant costs (cabinet power,
> > cabinet wear and tear, more battery banks, chargers, etc). You also
> > end up using far, far less fiber strands.
> >
>
> I tend to disagree, but this is one of those debates that could go on
> forever...
>
> Lord knows I've been having it since 2008.
>
> Mark.
>
