New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
Well, there is one major difference in all the examples you provided compared to the op. They all state maximum amount of data transferred and at what bandwidth.
Racknerd: 35TB @ 1Gbps. 35TB being the amount, and 1Gbps is the bandwidth.
PureVoltage: 100TB on 10Gbps. Again, amount and bandwidth.
OVH: 500Mbit/s - Limited traffic 10TB. Bandwidth and "traffic", which seems to be a common term to describe amount of data.
Crunchbits: 50TB @ 1Gbps. Again, amount and at what bandwidth.
Greencloud: 20TB @ 10Gbps. Once again, amount and bandwidth.
I don't really understand what you are trying to prove with these examples, since they all pretty clearly shows the bandwidth as the speed of the connection, which is what I have said all along.
But anyway, we are getting sidetracked here. The question was if port speed equals bandwidth, which I still claim it does not if there is a separate bandwidth stated.
Bandwidth: the speed at which you can download/upload.
Port speed: the speed of the physical layer, the interface.
Traffic/amount: how much data you are allowed to transfer. It is common to show it as "amount@bandwidth", like "10TB@1Gbps", but that does not mean that the two values are the same thing.
If they say 1Gbps on 10gbps they should have some type of over usage fee somewhere if not it could be hidden some place.
Typically they would either put a cap on their switch end because they deployed you on a 10G port but only selling 1Gbps.
I know we have plenty of clients with 5Gbps on 10gbps capped. It's possible they did the same but no clue would best be answered by the provider itself.