Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.

---

Re: Pac-Bell

Author:	Lantz Rowland
Posted:	4/5/2000; 12:11:59 PM
Topic:	scriptingNews outline for 4/5/00
Msg #:	15958 (In response to 15940)
Prev/Next:	15957 / 15959

Thank you very much for the Track-PacBell page. It has been a great sanity check to be able to determine when the issue is there as opposed to on my end.

In one of the..., pauses last night, I went to see how PacBell has been doing in the Matrix Internet Quality (MIQ) ratings [1] which I have used in the past for packet loss stats. I am not sure how PacBell did; I got sidetracked by the ATT statistics, especially in comparison to the statistics for the MindSpring IP we use. The current Monthly rating for ATT shows a latency (US) stat of 61ms and packet loss at .5% which is sweet. That also tracks with ATT's own report of their Packet Loss statistics [2] versus their service levels.

Then I got to thinking [which is dangerous], perhaps you and Userland would enjoy talking about the PacBell issue and the $2,000,000,000 investment [3] with management of the ATT IP Access group [4].

Lantz

• [1] MIQ Ratings
  <http://ratings.miq.net>;
• [2] ATT Backbone Loss
  <http://ipnetwork.bgtmo.ip.att.net/loss.html>;
• [3] ATT , BT and Concert to Invest $2,000,000,000 in Global Network of Internet Data Centers
  <http://www.att.com/press/item/0,1354,2772,00.html>;
• [4] ATT IP Access
  <http://www.ipservices.att.com/ipaccess/mis/>;

---

This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:54:41 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.