Re: [foxboro] FW: More future direction questions.
- From: stan <stanb@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 15:26:00 -0400
On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 03:07:42PM -0400, Johnson, Alex P (IPS) wrote:
> Either will work without issue.
>
> 100 Mbps is a huge amount of bandwidth for the type of operations that we do
> on our control network, i.e., data transfer and alarm messages.
>
> On stress testing for a large nuclear project, we generated several thousand
> alarms per second and sent them to a single AW. The total load was less than
> 55%.
>
> I doubt you could do that with your system.
>
>
I would hopen mot!
Thanks.
--
U.S. Encouraged by Vietnam Vote - Officials Cite 83% Turnout Despite Vietcong
Terror
- New York Times 9/3/1967
_______________________________________________________________________
This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process
Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at
your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html
foxboro mailing list: //www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
Other related posts:
