-=> Quoting Bo Simonsen to Leonard Erickson <=-

 BS> Hello Leonard!

 BS> May 08 01:35 03, Leonard Erickson wrote to Bo Simonsen:
 
 LE>> Nope. The B channels are 64k *if you are running data over them*.
 
 BS>> Ok, V110L and V120L is running 64k too?
 
 LE> From the nodelist comments:
 
 LE> V110L     ITU-T V.110 19k2 aasync ('low').
 LE> V110H     ITU-T V.110 38k4 async ('high').
 LE> V120L     ITU-T V.120 56k async, layer 2 framesize 259, window 7,
 LE>           modulo 8.
 LE> V120H     ITU-T V.120 64k async, layer 2 framesize 259, window 7,
 LE>           modulo 8.

 BS> Ok.. Is it possible to use V120H in the US? ... I allways use X.75, my
 BS> mailer disconnect after connect, then i use V120. 

No idea.
I never got into ISDN. It was too expensive until after DSL and cable
came in. 

 BS>> I'm charged for less if it made a Data isdn call. The transmission 
 BS>> tax is actually 2 cents lower. 
 
 LE> Well, nobody ever claimed the US phone companies were all that bright
 LE> about pricing things. The places were ISDN was flat rate it catch on
 LE> like made. In the places with excessive charges, it didn't catch on. 

 BS> Allright.. If ISDN was flatrate, i don't belive i had adsl.. I like
 BS> ISDN more.. 

I can get 1800 kbps down / 256k up for $50 a month with cable. And a
friend with DSL gets 256k up/down (and a static IP) for something
similar, and ISDN gives at best 128k up/down for a similar (if not
higher) price.

Given this, and the fact that to get that 128k with ISDN, you tie up
both the voice lines associated with it, ISDSN isn't all that
attractive.


--- FMailX 1.60