[38366] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: 95th Percentile = Lame
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joe Blanchard)
Mon Jun 4 00:50:06 2001
Message-ID: <E9BBE0941932D511934C0002A52CDB4E2D0699@sj-exchange.wyse.com>
From: Joe Blanchard <jblanchard@wyse.com>
To: 'Randy Bush' <randy@psg.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 21:40:54 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C0ECB0.8A1E88B0"
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C0ECB0.8A1E88B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Hmm, I thought 1's were high and 0's were low? lol
Oh well, such is digital..
-Joe Blanchard
-----Original Message-----
From: Randy Bush [mailto:randy@psg.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2001 9:26 PM
To: Joe Blanchard
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: RE: 95th Percentile = Lame
> In reading this thread. Does this mean that if I send an 0xFFFF bit
pattern
> to a network versus a 0x0000 pattern I'd be charged more for the energy
> consumption since all the 1's are high and consume more elecetric
no, it's the transitions from 0 to 1 or vice versa that take the energy.
that's why the nanog list is so repetitive, saves money.
randy
------_=_NextPart_001_01C0ECB0.8A1E88B0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2653.12">
<TITLE>RE: 95th Percentile = Lame</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Hmm, I thought 1's were high and 0's were low? lol</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Oh well, such is digital..</FONT>
</P>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>-Joe Blanchard</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>-----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>From: Randy Bush [<A HREF="mailto:randy@psg.com">mailto:randy@psg.com</A>]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2001 9:26 PM</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>To: Joe Blanchard</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Cc: nanog@merit.edu</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Subject: RE: 95th Percentile = Lame</FONT>
</P>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>> In reading this thread. Does this mean that if I send an 0xFFFF bit pattern</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> to a network versus a 0x0000 pattern I'd be charged more for the energy</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> consumption since all the 1's are high and consume more elecetric</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>no, it's the transitions from 0 to 1 or vice versa that take the energy.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>that's why the nanog list is so repetitive, saves money.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>randy</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C0ECB0.8A1E88B0--
