Clug Notes (was Re: TransACT)

[Bob Edwards]

Peter Barker wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2001 jeremy at itassist.net.au wrote:
> 
> > The answer was "no technical issue, we just don't do it"
> 
> Yup.

Actually, the answer was: we aren't going to allow it initially, but
it will happen later ("stage 2" was mentioned a number of times).

...
>  - recommend firewalls
>   - not plans to supply firewall/blocking stuff themselves

As I see it, any ISP or carrier who offers to "block" stuff is leaving
themselves wide open to litigation if someone then succeeds in breaking
into your machine. It might be like the police saying that they will
keep the streets clear of criminals, so no need to lock your doors.

...
>  - asymmetricity
>   - partly the hardware vendors building their equipment for it...
>   - purely configuration, though...
>    - 6Mbit symmetrical sounds good....

I would settle for 512k symmetric, or even 256k.

This argument that asymmetric data rates are built into the network
based on well known Internet practice just doesn't cut it with me.
TransACT are offering a peer-peer service - something not offered by
any other broadband network in the world (that I am aware of). Claiming
that the uplink costs more in this context is a crock. There is no
peer-peer precedent to base such a claim on.

>  - Bob put the hard word... end of Novemeber?
>   - "Some integration with the customer management system"....
>   - programming needs to be doing
>   - expected date:
>    - none to give. Need to make an informed thingy.

I believe one of the TransACT guys did say it would be "this year" (ie.
only an extra month to wait). Still, it isn't going to generate any
extra revenue for them, so I don't suppose they are going to be in that
much of a hurry.

(Haskell talk was good!).

Cheers,

Bob Edwards.