[no subject]

Pretty much the same line I got.  The main issue I have with pppoe is 
that you're adding yet another process into the whole system.  One more 
thing to break and one more thing to eat up cpu on the firewall.

That being said, I've not see any differences other then the higher 
speed which required me to get the pppoe.

-- 
Until later, Geoffrey


</pre>
<!--X-Body-of-Message-End-->
<!--X-MsgBody-End-->
<!--X-Follow-Ups-->
<hr>
<!--X-Follow-Ups-End-->
<!--X-References-->
<ul><li><strong>References</strong>:
<ul>
<li><strong><a name="01249" href="msg01249.html">[ale] OT Speedfactory Problems Anyone?</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> runman at speedfactory.net (Greg)</li></ul></li>
</ul></li></ul>
<!--X-References-End-->
<!--X-BotPNI-->
<ul>
<li>Prev by Date:
<strong><a href="msg01254.html">[ale] OT Speedfactory Problems Anyone?</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Next by Date:
<strong><a href="msg01256.html">[ale] Why LISP? (was Why Ruby?)</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Previous by thread:
<strong><a href="msg01249.html">[ale] OT Speedfactory Problems Anyone?</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Next by thread:
<strong><a href="msg01254.html">[ale] OT Speedfactory Problems Anyone?</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Index(es):
<ul>
<li><a href="maillist.html#01255"><strong>Date</strong></a></li>
<li><a href="threads.html#01255"><strong>Thread</strong></a></li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>

<!--X-BotPNI-End-->
<!--X-User-Footer-->
<!--X-User-Footer-End-->
</body>
</html>