UKVoIPTalk.com

"Brian A" <no_spam_bca1000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:m803s3p5htiv3dktd7vh7u0st71cg39hv7@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> On Sun, 24 Feb 2008 14:08:22 +0000, Mark <markincambs@yahoo.co.uk>
> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>On Sun, 24 Feb 2008 13:56:46 -0000, "Graham." <me@privacy.com> wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>>
>>>"Graham Murray" <newspost@gmurray.org.uk> wrote in message
>>>news:878x1aa38m.fsf@newton.gmurray.org.uk...
>>>> Steve <steev_l@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> How necessary is SPI in reality, for a home router?
>>>>
>>>> Would you even know is a router has SPI unless you look at the part
>>>> numbers of the chips on the board and see if a) They support the Serial
>>>> Peripheral Interface and b) that the appropriate pins are wired to
>>>> other
>>>> chip(s) which also support SPI. Whether SPI is used should be a
>>>> decision
>>>> for the hardware designer and be of no interest to the user, unless
>>>> the SPI bus is brought to a connector for an add-on board - but even
>>>> then unless the user is going to design his own add-on board this will
>>>> be of no interest to the user.
>>>
>>>I think we are talking about Stateful Packet Inspection here,
>>>[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stateful_firewall[/url][/color]
>>
>>We are indeed.[/color]
> I always use
> http:\\[url]www.acronymfinder.com[/url][/color]

You slashed the wrong way :-)
--
Graham

%Profound_observation%

"Graham Murray" <newspost@gmurray.org.uk> wrote in message
news:874pbya0ms.fsf@newton.gmurray.org.uk...[color=blue]
> "Gaz" <gazter@msn.com> writes:
>[color=green]
>> SPI is to do with internet packet inspection, is it not???[/color]
>
> Google would seem to indicate otherwise. The first hit on the query
> 'SPI' returns the Wikipedia article for 'Serial Peripheral Interface'
> (an inter-chip bus), which is also what SPI means to me. None of the
> hits returned on the first 5 pages use SPI in the context of packet
> inspection - which implies that that is a minority usage.[/color]


One can't help but sympathise, it so much depends on your background.
I always see 'upper side-band' when I see USB
and when I see DRM I have to check if its 'Digital Radio Mondial'
or 'Digital Rights Management' that is being discussed.
--
Graham

%Profound_observation%

"Graham." <me@privacy.com> wrote in message
news:fps06a$taq$1@registered.motzarella.org...[color=blue]
>
>
> "Brian A" <no_spam_bca1000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:m803s3p5htiv3dktd7vh7u0st71cg39hv7@4ax.com...[color=green]
>> On Sun, 24 Feb 2008 14:08:22 +0000, Mark <markincambs@yahoo.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>>On Sun, 24 Feb 2008 13:56:46 -0000, "Graham." <me@privacy.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Graham Murray" <newspost@gmurray.org.uk> wrote in message
>>>>news:878x1aa38m.fsf@newton.gmurray.org.uk...
>>>>> Steve <steev_l@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> How necessary is SPI in reality, for a home router?
>>>>>
>>>>> Would you even know is a router has SPI unless you look at the part
>>>>> numbers of the chips on the board and see if a) They support the
>>>>> Serial
>>>>> Peripheral Interface and b) that the appropriate pins are wired to
>>>>> other
>>>>> chip(s) which also support SPI. Whether SPI is used should be a
>>>>> decision
>>>>> for the hardware designer and be of no interest to the user, unless
>>>>> the SPI bus is brought to a connector for an add-on board - but even
>>>>> then unless the user is going to design his own add-on board this will
>>>>> be of no interest to the user.
>>>>
>>>>I think we are talking about Stateful Packet Inspection here,
>>>>[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stateful_firewall[/url]
>>>
>>>We are indeed.[/color]
>> I always use
>> http:\\[url]www.acronymfinder.com[/url][/color]
>
> You slashed the wrong way :-)
> --
> Graham
>
> %Profound_observation%[/color]

Terrible eh, he has had to go home and change his trousers now!

In article <62dcrpF22ebehU1@mid.individual.net>,
Nick <Nick.Spam@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:[color=blue]
>Gordon Henderson wrote:
>[color=green]
>>[color=darkred]
>>> I'm a VoIP user and there's a trade-off in choice of ATA/router if SPI
>>> is something I should consider.[/color]
>>
>> You want (a) a good ISP - none of your 9.99 a month rubbish, and (b) a
>> router/firewall that can do outbound QoS.
>>
>> Gordon[/color]
>
>Which ISPs support outbound qos. I thought QoS at the moment was only
>really handled in your LAN.[/color]

It is. But what you can do is limit the 'damage' caused by outgoing
traffic leaving your LAN to the world wide wait. E.g. uploading large
email, p2p traffic and so on. As incoming is usually much faster than
outgoing, it's less of an issue (most of the time)

Gordon

>>> I always use[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>> http:\\[url]www.acronymfinder.com[/url][/color]
>>
>> You slashed the wrong way :-)
>> --
>> Graham
>>
>> %Profound_observation%[/color]
>
> Terrible eh, he has had to go home and change his trousers now![/color]

No doubt he will blame his Taylor for not asking the relevant question.

--
Graham

%Profound_observation%

Graham Murray wrote:[color=blue]
> "Gaz" <gazter@msn.com> writes:
>[color=green]
>> SPI is to do with internet packet inspection, is it not???[/color]
>
> Google would seem to indicate otherwise. The first hit on the query
> 'SPI' returns the Wikipedia article for 'Serial Peripheral Interface'[/color]

Good example of why not to rely on websearches alone. SPI with respect
to firewalls is Stateful Packet Inspection.

Mark McIntyre <markmcintyre@spamcop.net> writes:
[color=blue]
> Graham Murray wrote:[color=green]
>> "Gaz" <gazter@msn.com> writes:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> SPI is to do with internet packet inspection, is it not???[/color]
>>
>> Google would seem to indicate otherwise. The first hit on the query
>> 'SPI' returns the Wikipedia article for 'Serial Peripheral Interface'[/color]
>
> Good example of why not to rely on websearches alone. SPI with respect
> to firewalls is Stateful Packet Inspection.[/color]

Yet the original post did not mention firewalls, it mentioned
routers. It is perfectly conceivable that a router might use an SPI bus
as a data highway between 2 or more of its chips.

"Graham Murray" <newspost@gmurray.org.uk> wrote in message
news:87prul9aeo.fsf@newton.gmurray.org.uk...[color=blue]
> Mark McIntyre <markmcintyre@spamcop.net> writes:
>[color=green]
>> Graham Murray wrote:[color=darkred]
>>> "Gaz" <gazter@msn.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> SPI is to do with internet packet inspection, is it not???
>>>
>>> Google would seem to indicate otherwise. The first hit on the query
>>> 'SPI' returns the Wikipedia article for 'Serial Peripheral Interface'[/color]
>>
>> Good example of why not to rely on websearches alone. SPI with respect
>> to firewalls is Stateful Packet Inspection.[/color]
>
> Yet the original post did not mention firewalls, it mentioned
> routers. It is perfectly conceivable that a router might use an SPI bus
> as a data highway between 2 or more of its chips.[/color]

A detail only likely to be of interest to its designer. Stateful Packet
Inspection,
being a feature, is much more likely to be of interest to the end-user
--
Graham

%Profound_observation%

Graham Murray wrote:[color=blue]
> Mark McIntyre <markmcintyre@spamcop.net> writes:
>[color=green]
>> Graham Murray wrote:[color=darkred]
>>> "Gaz" <gazter@msn.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> SPI is to do with internet packet inspection, is it not???
>>> Google would seem to indicate otherwise. The first hit on the query
>>> 'SPI' returns the Wikipedia article for 'Serial Peripheral Interface'[/color]
>> Good example of why not to rely on websearches alone. SPI with respect
>> to firewalls is Stateful Packet Inspection.[/color]
>
> Yet the original post did not mention firewalls, it mentioned
> routers. It is perfectly conceivable that a router might use an SPI bus
> as a data highway between 2 or more of its chips.[/color]

Who was it who said Google would seem to indicate otherwise. Type in SPI
router and the references all appear to be to Stateful Packet Inspection.

In future maybe it would be better to just admit you made a mistake?

In message <fps06a$taq$1@registered.motzarella.org>, Graham.
<me@privacy.com> writes[color=blue]
>
>
>"Brian A" <no_spam_bca1000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:m803s3p5htiv3dktd7vh7u0st71cg39hv7@4ax.com...[color=green]
>> On Sun, 24 Feb 2008 14:08:22 +0000, Mark <markincambs@yahoo.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>>On Sun, 24 Feb 2008 13:56:46 -0000, "Graham." <me@privacy.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Graham Murray" <newspost@gmurray.org.uk> wrote in message
>>>>news:878x1aa38m.fsf@newton.gmurray.org.uk...
>>>>> Steve <steev_l@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> How necessary is SPI in reality, for a home router?
>>>>>
>>>>> Would you even know is a router has SPI unless you look at the part
>>>>> numbers of the chips on the board and see if a) They support the Serial
>>>>> Peripheral Interface and b) that the appropriate pins are wired to
>>>>> other
>>>>> chip(s) which also support SPI. Whether SPI is used should be a
>>>>> decision
>>>>> for the hardware designer and be of no interest to the user, unless
>>>>> the SPI bus is brought to a connector for an add-on board - but even
>>>>> then unless the user is going to design his own add-on board this will
>>>>> be of no interest to the user.
>>>>
>>>>I think we are talking about Stateful Packet Inspection here,
>>>>[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stateful_firewall[/url]
>>>
>>>We are indeed.[/color]
>> I always use
>> http:\\[url]www.acronymfinder.com[/url][/color]
>
>You slashed the wrong way :-)[/color]

Does that mean he was pissing into the wind :-)

--
Spock