Re: [OT] Internet lag/connectivity options

["mark_harrison_uk2" <mph@xxxxxxx>]

Pete,

If your American company uses someone like Globix as their ISP, then
it may be sensible to get the same ISP for the UK (which, even if
it's a separate pipe, will still be cheaper than a private frame
link.)

Most of the big global Telcos publish backbone networks. Most of them
underutilise their core backbone capacity.

It _may_ be worth paying for QoS stuff, but in practice using the
same ISP, assuming they've a good backbone) may be enough.

Regards,

Mark

--- In ukha_d@xxxxxxx, "White, Peter" <peter.white@b...>
wrote:
>
> Hi All
>
> This is totally OT, but I know there's lots of clever IT types on
the
> list....
>
> We're setting up a system between my company, and 2 other third-
party
> companies.  One of these is based in the US and has a leased line
into us,
> so no probs.  The other is based in Milton Keynes, and requires
connectivity
> into our SAP system in Dallas, which they'll get via a web front-
end.  This
> isn't high-bandwidth stuff, but the screen refreshes must be fast,
with no
> noticeable lag.  We'd originally planned to do this over the web,
but the
> other companies have big concerns about slowed response times
during the
> afternoon (when the US wakes up); apparently they've had problems
before.
>
> So, on the basis that we don't want to spend a small fortune on a
dedicated
> leased line, what other options do we have??  We could host the SAP
Web
> server in the UK, but I'm not sure that would help.  We've
currently got a
> 2Mb VPN connection between us and our US parent company, but
presumably this
> is also venerable to the web slowdown?
>
> In summary - we have VPN to our parent company.  Third-party 1,
also based
> near Dallas, has multiple leased-lines into the parent company.
Third-party
> 2, in MK, has a 20Gb(!) internet pipe, but no other existing
connectivity to
> us.  We need to provide on-line access to the MK company, with no
noticeable
> contention, but for the lowest cost solution (but they will not
accept a
> 'web-based' solution, though that is open to interpretation.
>
> Email me off-list if you prefer.
>
> Thanks, Pete
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]