Pete wrote:
>
> > I'm curious...why bother having Ultra AND Jetstream?
> >
> > Why not one or the other?
>
> Jetstream is fast (for interactive traffic like ssh and telnet).
>
> But costs to much for high bandwidth useage.
>

True...but the $60.00mth you spend on Ultra would get another 300Mb/mth on
top of Jetstream 600, or the $120 mth you spend on Jetstream would get you
another 80 hours on Ultra Swift 300.

> Was more of a "can it be done" type question. More interested
> in wether it can
> be done technically than looking for another solution (almost
> certian it won't
> be implemented, but just interested, ya know?)
>
I think you could turn off NAT completely, which would take care of
outgoing, but you'd have to receive everything via Ultra.

Not sure if all protocols would be happy with this though.

What's the legal position on using an alternate return path?

> PS - sorry for the direct reply Rob - that bloody reply-to
> gets me every time :(
>
S'okay...I live to read email....(Actually I let inbox rules handle that
kind of thing!)

This message is part of the NZ Broadband mailing list.
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ,
and various documents.
To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@unixathome.org
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message
Received on Mon Nov 13 09:52:06 2000