Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!nntp.coast.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!avondale.demon.co.uk!avondale.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail
From: jfhall@avondale.demon.co.uk (John F Hall)
Newsgroups: demon.ip.support,demon.tech.unix,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Batch FTP and Web Pages
Date: 9 Jul 1996 15:46:09 +0100
Organization: -
Lines: 104
Message-ID: <4rtrbh$2s8@avondale.demon.co.uk>
References: <31D4AA3A.BC0@www.play-hookey.com> <4rjrkt$ih@anorak.coverform.lan> <4rphs7$158@avondale.demon.co.uk> <4rr0us$fj@anorak.coverform.lan>
NNTP-Posting-Host: avondale.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: avondale.demon.co.uk
In article <4rr0us$fj@anorak.coverform.lan>,
Brian Somers <brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>John F Hall (jfhall@avondale.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>: In article <4rjrkt$ih@anorak.coverform.lan>,
>: Brian Somers <brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>: >Hey ? I'm not talking about dividing anything.
>
>: Hmmm, are you then totally incompetent, not even capable of understanding
>: your own articles?
>
>I must be. Explain this "dividing" please. I am obviously not operating
>at the same competence level as you are.
Message-ID: <4rcr6v$dh@anorak.coverform.lan>
"Let's see, 45,000,000 bits / 65,000 users = 692 *bits* each.
Woooooffff !"
You do know what "division" is???
>: >Oh give me a break. Haven't you heard of the web ?
>
>: Yes, so what? Haven't *you* heard of the other Internet applications?
>
>So what do you think.... since the internet was publicised, lots of
>non-technical people have access. What are they going to do. Understand
>logging in as "anonymous", asking "archie", using telnet, gopher ....
>I wonder what they use ? I wonder what percentage un-technical there
>are on the internet as compared with technical ?
>
>I *really* hate to bicker, but IMO, "techies" vs "users" is a very
>small number these days.
No one is talking about other users, nor "technies" vs "users". *You*
have chosen to make various assertions. Do *you* understand what you're
talking about?
>Well, the whole point of this discussion is that *I* don't think that
>it's the US. I think it's the demon->US bandwidth.
So you produce totally specious, obviously incorrect arguments. Hardly
the way to convince others.
>Right.... so..... if we add the bandwidths of the lines, we have one
>line.... I'm talking virtual. We're all routing through one router
Ah, yes, if you add all the bandwidths together and *pretend* they're
one line, there's one line. Big deal. BTW there's *not* just one
router.
>- at least everyone I know on demon connects to demon-du.demon.co.uk.
Ever heard "when you're in a hole, stop digging" - or are you determined
to show you don't know what you're talking about!
demon-du.demon.co.uk is *not* a router, it's the access computer one
dials into. "demon-du" - demon-dial-up - get it?
demon-du.demon.co.uk is *not* a single machine, it's a name that is
aliased to whichever machine you dial into, of which there are *many*.
It's done so that everyone has a single name they can build into access
scripts if needed.
demon-du.demon.co.uk is nothing to do with routing to the US.
traceroute to compuserve.com (149.174.216.15)
1 finch-145.access.demon.net (194.159.253.145)
2 trude-access.router.demon.net (194.159.253.99)
3 core-a.router.demon.net (194.159.252.252)
4 204.6.105.1 (204.6.105.1)
5 t16.sc.psi.net (38.1.3.26)
6 mae-west.sf.compuserve.net (198.32.136.59)
7 hssi3-core.sf.compuserve.net (205.156.223.233)
8 atm1-03-core.arl.compuserve.net (205.156.223.45)
9 205.156.223.53 (205.156.223.53)
10 arl-gw-5.compuserve.com (149.174.216.15)
You can call finch-145.access.demon.net demon-du.demon.co.uk if it makes
you happy, but that only applies to that particular login.
The roundabout way to Columbus Ohio via psi.net, mae-west, and San
Fransisco makes me think that that route went down the new line. :-)
>: >1994 was when things started downhill. 1995 was bottom.
>: >1996 looks promising.
>
>: It isn't only Demon that grown explosively in the last two years. So
>: has the traffic in the US. Demon has had it's bottlenecks from time to
>: time, but now seems on top of them. However that doesn't mean that
>: there won't be bottlenecks elsewhere.
>
>Ok, I agree with this, there are bottlenecks outside of demon, but I
>think that the whole UK-US thing is almost completely Demons fault.
>I believe something along the lines of 1994 = "internet boom", 1995
>= "Demon: oh dear, we cannae cope captn". Only now is Demon catching
>up with demand.
You're entitled to your beliefs, even to present them to us. But if you
want others to share them, produce *sensible* arguments, rather than
obvious nonsense. As it is the preponderance of evidence is against
you.
--
John F Hall jfhall@avondale.demon.co.uk CompuServe: 100016,1210