|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 09:47:13 -0700 From: Adam McKenna <adam-nanog@flounder.net> To: "'nanog@merit.edu'" <nanog@merit.edu> Message-ID: <20010816094713.K10970@flounder.net> Mail-Followup-To: "'nanog@merit.edu'" <nanog@merit.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <B1A9AEECE563D211893F0080AD30E2F44C6088@pegasus> Mail-Copies-To: never Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu On Thu, Aug 16, 2001 at 11:01:54AM -0500, Cerqua, Toby wrote: > > hey all, > > we've got a client that wants some crazy stuff, and i need either > suggestions or confirmation that this is impossible/too expensive. > > client needs 45Mbps pushed over 20 miles... and he wants it wireless. the > kicker is that they don't want a T3 because it is "too expensive" and it > would take too long to get installed. it doesn't need to be constant, but he > wants to move of 2.5GB within 45 minutes. this is in the chicago area, if > that helps any. so, i don't know, satellite? Have he taken a look at RFC 1149? BTW, since I haven't posted in a while, I might as well get the most out of this one -- kudos to the networking wizards who posted yesterday that didn't know the difference between 192.0.0.0/16 and 192.0.0.0/8. I was especially amused with the guy who thought it had something to do with RFC 1918. --Adam
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |