-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
How much does t1 cost?
Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
wfbberzerker
Lifer
i agree with ultimatebob, try and find business class dsl or cable, thats probly your best bet.
If all you want to do is run 2 servers with those games, then rent the servers from a remote location. You will save yourself a ton of money.....probably looking at about $45-$60 a month each. Much cheaper thasn running your own T line...plus you won't have to buy 2 more computers. Look up the company Ilan (based in Houston, Boston, and Washington.....the Houston servers are the best ones they have, running off an OC-48 if I'm not mistaken, the others run off an OC-3 or an OC-12)
You would get remote access VIA internet and FTP.....plus save yourself a bundle.
You would get remote access VIA internet and FTP.....plus save yourself a bundle.
hey guys, kinda off topic. i also work for a lan cafe, and recently we switched from UUnet to some lower name aliangence T1 host. we used to run off a cisco 2600 router, but with the new T1 that we got now, they gave us some crappy altron 5000 router. we experance random lags now and i trying to figure it out why. with UUnet, we didnt have any lag at all for the whole year. we have 35 computers, so would the lag be coming from the new crappy router or the ISP?
here in socal, UUnet charged us 1,100 per month for T1, thats why we switch to other one for only 700 per month. the main poster mention 36comps, its going to eat up around 100KB/sec of bandwidth. with us, when all 35copms + 3 servers are running, its usually using 80-100KB/sec. around 20 comps playing CS, and rest was moh+WC3.
here in socal, UUnet charged us 1,100 per month for T1, thats why we switch to other one for only 700 per month. the main poster mention 36comps, its going to eat up around 100KB/sec of bandwidth. with us, when all 35copms + 3 servers are running, its usually using 80-100KB/sec. around 20 comps playing CS, and rest was moh+WC3.
"All T1s are not created equal"
Well, actually, the T1 local loop is going to give you 1.5 mbps, yup, it is. Then it's going to some central location where they're going to stuff too many T1s into a larger pipe. This is also part of "the great Lie of DSL:" you get dedicated bandwidth, but once it hits the Central Office (the "switch room"), it all gets stuffed into the same common pipe, usually with a great deal of oversubscription. COVAD is notorious for massive oversubscription ... in Chicago, SpeakEasy split from COVAD and built their own POP so they could get their service levels up.
Some oversubscription at the points of aggregation is normal business, HOW MUCH the big pipe is oversubscribed is what makes a good provider versus a bad provider. If you toss in some additional oversubscription for Frame Relay, it's going to slow down periodically.
Check out the Service Level Agreements (SLAs). If you want better service (less latency, less congestion, less oversubscription) it'll cost you more.
UUNet is a premium provider: They own more of the Internet plumbing than anyone. They're top-tier (they connect directly to the "big pipes"). Smaller, cheaper ISPs / providers are usually NOT top-tier. they buy bandwidth from someone that buys it from a top-tier company. At each level, the owner of that chunk of bandwidth divides up the bandwidth with (usually) some oversubscription.
I could set up a DS3 MUX in my house, and sell all of the neighbors a T1. Then I'll route all those T1s through my MUX and into my cable modem (with a whopping 256K uplink). They all would have T1s, but they'll NEVER see anything above 256K of throughput (end-to-end).
The key is to figure out what service level you need to get the task done, then find a provider that'll guarantee that service level for the best price (and other features). If that's "too expensive," your two choices are to reduce your needs, or pay up.
Service level includes availability (how much down time), performance (throughput, latency, etc), and other possible features like security, 7X24 Network Operation Centers, monitoring, maintenance ...
Like nearly everything else, "you get what you pay for."
JM .02
Scott
Well, actually, the T1 local loop is going to give you 1.5 mbps, yup, it is. Then it's going to some central location where they're going to stuff too many T1s into a larger pipe. This is also part of "the great Lie of DSL:" you get dedicated bandwidth, but once it hits the Central Office (the "switch room"), it all gets stuffed into the same common pipe, usually with a great deal of oversubscription. COVAD is notorious for massive oversubscription ... in Chicago, SpeakEasy split from COVAD and built their own POP so they could get their service levels up.
Some oversubscription at the points of aggregation is normal business, HOW MUCH the big pipe is oversubscribed is what makes a good provider versus a bad provider. If you toss in some additional oversubscription for Frame Relay, it's going to slow down periodically.
Check out the Service Level Agreements (SLAs). If you want better service (less latency, less congestion, less oversubscription) it'll cost you more.
UUNet is a premium provider: They own more of the Internet plumbing than anyone. They're top-tier (they connect directly to the "big pipes"). Smaller, cheaper ISPs / providers are usually NOT top-tier. they buy bandwidth from someone that buys it from a top-tier company. At each level, the owner of that chunk of bandwidth divides up the bandwidth with (usually) some oversubscription.
I could set up a DS3 MUX in my house, and sell all of the neighbors a T1. Then I'll route all those T1s through my MUX and into my cable modem (with a whopping 256K uplink). They all would have T1s, but they'll NEVER see anything above 256K of throughput (end-to-end).
The key is to figure out what service level you need to get the task done, then find a provider that'll guarantee that service level for the best price (and other features). If that's "too expensive," your two choices are to reduce your needs, or pay up.
Service level includes availability (how much down time), performance (throughput, latency, etc), and other possible features like security, 7X24 Network Operation Centers, monitoring, maintenance ...
Like nearly everything else, "you get what you pay for."
JM .02
Scott
Sounds like this is for business since you say 30 some computers, but If it were me I wouldnt choose t1, the price to speed ratio is terrible. A business dsl line would be alot cheaper(about $1000 cheaper..lol) and you would see about the same speeds, wont be a dedicated circuit like a T1, but the thourghput will be about the same..
You shouldnt need no crazy bandwidth for anything like that anyway unless you need to send alot of large files.
You shouldnt need no crazy bandwidth for anything like that anyway unless you need to send alot of large files.
deadseasquirrel
Golden Member
others are right. you get what you pay for. i worked for allegiance for a year, selling T1s. they claim to be a tier-1 backbone (the former digex backbone), but their network is full of lag. not to mention the downtime. can't tell you how many customers i lost. i work for uunet now (actually mci... same thing). 53% of all internet traffic runs on uunet. the network is tight and reliable. but, yes, it does cost ya.
all i can say is ride out your contract (unless you have some serious downtime that breeches that contract) and re-evaluate what your requirements are. if you have customers complaining and not wanting to visit your location because of poor quality, you will need to spend a little more. if you're running a business and only employees complain that things are slow and it doesn't hinder productivity, then by all means, get any one of the cheap $399/mo T1s that are floating around out there these days... just make sure it's not metered and restricts you to 2GB/mo transfer or something like that.
deadseasquirrel
so its safe to assume its the ISP and not router then? we still got the cisco 2600 router from uunet, but i am not knowledgable to config it to allegiance. we just deciding if its worth the risk to mess around with the network to reconfig router. at one side, we want to try to fix this random lag at little cost, but on other side, why mess with whats not broken. hmmm........... :lips:
yhelothar
Lifer
you don't need a fast connection for games.. it's all about distance...
plus if you're gonna have that many comps.. why not just do LAN... no need for any connections.. prolly only to go online..
so i'd get a 3-4Mbit dsl/cable line, with only like 512kbps upload.. it should only cost around $200 a month...
plus if you're gonna have that many comps.. why not just do LAN... no need for any connections.. prolly only to go online..
so i'd get a 3-4Mbit dsl/cable line, with only like 512kbps upload.. it should only cost around $200 a month...
deadseasquirrel
Golden Member
yeah, i dont think the router would change much. iirc, allegiance uses the adtran router now (cisco was costing way too much, and since they include the router for free, well, they were losing their shorts). adtran is a fine enough router. you should still be able to configure the cisco if you'd like tho. i'm sure your internal numbering is still the same, you'd just need to input allegiance's IP addresses they gave you into the cisco (default gateway, subnet mask, etc.). the cisco has an expansion wic where you could add another T1, whereas the adtran does not. other than that, functionally, they're gonna do the same thing. allegiance's network just isn't very robust. they had great difficulty implementing MPLS thru their cisco gsr routers, trying desperately to migrate internet traffic from many different networks onto a sole backbone and those different links weren't jiving (cisco boxes not talking to juniper boxes, etc). i suppose my long-winded point is that the random lag is most likely allegiance's network. i saw it many times in the year i was there... ping times through the roof, latency everywhere. if i were you, i'd definitely call the local office there and complain to the city VP that you want credits. my cvp was giving it away like a hooker at mardi gras.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
