telecom, Dedicated Internet Line

comp.dcom.telecom - Telecommunications digest. (Moderated)


telecom >> Dedicated Internet Line

by mike4ty4 » Mon, 26 Jul 2004 10:29:49 GMT

Hi,

Is it possible, physically, to build a dedicated hard line directly
into the Internet?

Top

telecom >> Dedicated Internet Line

by kludge » Tue, 27 Jul 2004 03:44:42 GMT



Sure. Most sites do. Why?

Scott

"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Top

telecom >> Dedicated Internet Line

by johnl » Tue, 27 Jul 2004 03:52:02 GMT

> Is it possible, physically, to build a dedicated hard line directly

Considering that "the Internet" doesn't exist as a single physical
thing, no.

It's easy enough to get a dedicated line to any of the ISPs and NSPs
that comprise the Internet, of course.
Top

telecom >> Dedicated Internet Line

by DevilsPGD » Tue, 27 Jul 2004 04:28:32 GMT

In message < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > XXXX@XXXXX.COM



What is "the Internet"

A DSL line could easily qualify, depending on what exactly you're
trying to do.


Nobody ever lost money underestimating the human intelligence.
-- P.T.Barnum
Top

telecom >> Dedicated Internet Line

by Hammond of Texas » Tue, 27 Jul 2004 04:53:39 GMT


No. If it were, the Matrix would have you in minutes.
Top

telecom >> Dedicated Internet Line

by T. Sean Weintz » Tue, 27 Jul 2004 05:24:37 GMT


That question does not actually make sense.

Firstly, there is no single object known as the "internet" - it is a
collection of many many many different networks that are all
interconnected.

Taking my above point into account, you could argue that any leased
line connection to an ISP is exactly that - a dedicated hard line to
the internet. I mean wouldn't a T1 line (not frame - pt to pt) to a
major ISP qualify as exactly that? Esp if you run BGP over it? One
could even argue that if you are running BGP, you not only have a
direct hard line to the internet, but that your local network actually
is part of the internet.
Top

telecom >> Dedicated Internet Line

by Barry Margolin » Tue, 27 Jul 2004 07:35:23 GMT

In article < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >, XXXX@XXXXX.COM




Yes. Just run a serial or ethernet cable directly from an ISP's router
to your computer.


Barry Margolin, XXXX@XXXXX.COM
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: To those of you who have participated
in this particular thread ('dedicated hard line to the Internet')
shouldn't we define our terms? For example how many folks know the
difference between the 'Internet' (with an uppercase /I/) and the
'internet' (with a lowercase /i/) and what we frequently refer to
just as the 'net', I have always heard that the 'internet' consists
of many interconnected networks, of which the 'Internet' (itself a
collection of networks) is but one part. I have always assumed I was
hardwired to the net because of my 'always on' cable or DSL connection
as opposed to what we all used to do years ago, with dial-up. Any
comments? PAT]
Top
Similar Threads

1. Internet access for remote site over dedicated T1 line w/ Cisco 1720s 

Please Please Please help!!!!!

Site A has a Dedicated T1 Point-to-Point with Site B using cisco 1720
routers.  Site A also has a cisco 2501 router for internet access.
Site A can get to the internet.  I want site be to be able to use Site
A's connection to the internet through the dedicated T1.  Check the
specs and tell me what I'm doing wrong:

Site A:
cisco 1720- WAN Serial0= 192.168.1.254
            LAN Ethernet= 10.10.40.254

cisco 2501- LAN ethernet= 10.10.40.1

Site B:
cisco 1720- WAN Serial0= 192.168.1.253
            LAN ethernet= 10.10.50.254

Now here's the real treachery.  My SIte B router can only see (ping)the
Site A cisco 1720.  My Site B clients, though can ping and see any
clients in site A but not the 2501 router in Site A.  I've already
changed the default route to all possible options...Nothing.  All my
traceroutes from Site B router stop at 192.168.1.254.  My firewall has
given free roaming privileges to Site B (the 10... and 192...)...Still
nothing.  What am I doing wrong?  Am I missing a protocol? something
not enabled?  If more info is needed please let me know.  I'm drowning
here.  I have decent working knowledge of networks but my cisco router
configuring is still young.  Please, explain like I'm slow.
Thanks in advance

2. terminal server, dedicated line

3. Dedicated Remote Desktop lines 

Let's say I have a bunch of XP Pro computers in a workgroup network where 
Computer 1 is used to control Computer 2 through Remote Desktop. Is it 
possible to install a 2nd NIC on both of these computers and use these 2 NICs 
as the carrier media for the Remote Desktop sessions exclusively? In other 
words, is it possible to tell XP Pro to use a particular NIC to communicate 
with another XP machine and have that machine only uses a particular NIC to 
"reply"?

4. removing internet explorer working off line,when on line - Windows XP

5. Two NICs, wireless dedicated for internet access 

I have two computers at home, each with a 100BASE-T and a wireless NIC. The 
wireless NICs are connecting to a broadband router for internet access, and 
the 100BASE-T NICs I wish to use for PC-to-PC transfer only.

How do I configure my WinXP desktops to always use the wireless for 
internet, and the 100BASE-Ts for PC-to-PC only?

Brgds
Trond Svendsen

6. Can I dedicate each PRI channel to a specific Dial-in user

7. dedicated external ports 

I have a number of catalyst 3750 stackable switches in the network.
We are on 5 floors, each floor has it's own catalyst stack which ties
into the core stack on the 1st floor.  We are also layer 3 ip routing
capable and have a number of vlans defined.  I have some requests to
run some dedicated ports, on other floors,  that terminate to a switch
that's connected outside the firewall.  I'm thinking the way i have to
do this is to define a vlan on an ip range that is defined on our
external static range.  Then connect the ports in the other floors, to
access mode configured vlan ports at the floor switches and the core
switch.  Then connect the core port to the external switch.  If done
this way, i believe i'd have to route our external public address
range internally.  Is there another way to do this.  Thanks

8. Newbie: async mode dedicated versus async mode interactive!!