[502] in Resnet-Forum
Re: Remote Access
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Larry Owen)
Tue Feb 21 11:32:32 1995
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 10:05:57 -0600
From: owen@noc.Auburn.EDU (Larry Owen)
To: resnet-forum@MIT.EDU
Steve Morytko writes:
>Something to consider about Internet providers: They can (and probably
>will) sell as many accounts as possible and run them over the cheapest
>(read slowest) link possible. This could be hundreds of users hammering
>on a single 56KB link - that would seem like a sloooow link to me. Also,
>you're clients (are they students that have to get REAL work done for
>classes?) will be competing with everyone in the neighborhood for access.
>That could mean a lot of frustrated users/students getting busy signals.
>Perhaps it wouldn't be true if you're lucky enough to have a provider
>without a lot of business.
>
>Anyone have any first-hand experience? Say with Net Cruiser or some
>other vendors. A computer store in our area is planning to go into this
>business.
I was briefed on MCI's campus Internet offering a couple of days ago,
and it addresses most of your concerns (and then some). Specificly,
they commit to providing sufficient modems/ports/lines to provide a
P.01 level of service (ie. only 1 call in 100 gets a busy); they have
a dedicated T1 back into MCInet for every 48 modems (should be more
than sufficient); the University gets to approve *everyone* they
market the service to. Pricing seems reasonable: $12/month for
first 15 hours, 75 cents/hour after that, and no signup fees. This
really looks to be a *very* attractive service. University role
includes: allowing/assisting MCI's marketing of this service (and
*only* this service) on campus; collocation of equipment (MCI buys/
provides all the trunks, etc.); "second-level" hardware support
(ie. someone on call to change out a modem, power-cycle a terminal
server, etc. -- MCI monitors all equipment via snmp from central location);
the hard one -- software support, but you're stuck with that if you do
it yourself, too.
>I like the idea of a private network for our University affliated users.
>They get to use our higher speed pipe (T1). We've installed PPP servers
>(that *can* also do IPX and ARAP) and we're selling the service back for
>$25 startup/$60 per 6 month period (and I think we make a small profit).
>The downside is managing the whole thing (accounts, money transfer, etc.).
>It's a pilot project now but I see it getting a whole lot bigger.
I like the idea of dial-up Mosaic/Netscape users using someone else's
pipe for Internet surfing, rather than the University's lifeline.
MCI's service can also support IPX and AppleTalk. MCI does the billing,
and can bill the end-user, University departments, or a combination.
If you use any of their other services, they can do combined/custom
billing.
>We can get a better feel for how much demand there is too and, hopefully,
>manage our resources accordingly. Once you've established a server/modem
>template it's fairly easy to replicate. Our first pass we expect a 4-1
>ratio of users to ports (any comments?).
Again, if you have a service-level commitment from the outsourcing
contractor, you don't have to worry about the amount of equipment.
>Yes, it works for Mac's (Mac TCP, Mac PPP) and PC's (Trumpet Winsock PPP)
>and you get full Internet access. We use (today) Xyplex 1620 Access Servers
>and 28.8 modems (USR Sportster standalone). Kerberos for authentication.
>Other vendors selling access servers are Xylogics, Livingston, Cicso, Asante,
>Cayman, and more.
MCI uses Xyplex terminal servers, Kerberos, Cisco routers, and I
forget whose 28.8 Kbps modems (rack mounted and snmp manageable).
They are also working toward offering ISDN access.
Larry Owen
p.s. I hope nothing I was told was supposed to be non-disclosure :-).
