An online meter? in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r8834672 en Sat, 28 Nov 2009 17:46:23 EDT Sat, 28 Nov 2009 17:46:23 EDT Re: An online meter? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8880096 CCCMTech : Maybe I just don't understand cable's reasoning but, users have their bandwidth hard capped at the modem to a set speed, lets say 3000/256.
Cable is shared in the neighborhood, sharing the connection. DSL has dedicated ATM circuits to the end users capping at the CO. We have sufficient bandwidth to the CO to handle the traffic our users generate... let's do some basics..

Figuring many companies use DS3s and OC3s we'll say cable is using a DS3/T3, that is 45 mbps. Ok, figuring at the max speed, 3 mbps, is would only take 15 simultaneous users to max out this connection. As much as they try, they will not download more than 3 mbps, legally.

Now DSL is shared at the CO and beyond so bandwidth still has to be balanced. So if we're offering the standard 1.5 mbps and using a DS3 it would take about 30 people to max us out at the CO. Considering many DSL users are going to 6 mbps it would only take about 7 people at 6 mbps. If we have more users than bandwidth your first hop pings start suffering because the CO is bottlenecking.

So why does cable have this problem and DSL doesn't? The only I can figure is, as I have said, we use multiple OC3s (~155 mbps usually about 3 OC3s or 465 mbps) where as most cable companies use 1 to 2 DS3s...in my area with adelphia, we're currently being powered by multiple T1s!
--
Thank you for choosing SBC Internet Services. My name is Rick. How may I help you today?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8880096 Wed, 24 Dec 2003 11:44:13 EDT Re: An online meter? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8856781 J D McDorce :
said by Matisaro See Profile:
He uploaded 25 gigs, which is equvalent to downloading 350 gigs, check the thread and your sources.
How do you draw a equivalency comparison between upload and download? Due to characteristics inherent in the design of a DOCSIS cable internet system, uploading and downloading have entirely different potential effects on the local cable system (CM to CMTS).]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8856781 Sun, 21 Dec 2003 22:31:22 EDT Re: An online meter? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8856652 JTRockville : So... which is it?

25 GB?
100 GB?
350 GB?

Indeed, it's a mystery!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8856652 Sun, 21 Dec 2003 22:16:36 EDT Re: An online meter? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8847079 Matisaro :
quote:
One person that was terminated downloaded 60G in one month. That is way below the 100G that you say.

People should be allowed to download whatever they want. If comcast wants to charge more for heavy use let them charge more. The problem is not charging more or less, the problem is that the technology is reaching it's limits and cable companies don't have a clear upgrade path/strategy to accommodate more users. Like the article said "1% of users are using 28% of bandwidth" and "6% of users are using 78% of the bandwidth"

Comcast is just waiting for somebody else to lay the fiber and then use it... much like MCI and AT&T in 1982.


He uploaded 25 gigs, which is equvalent to downloading 350 gigs, check the thread and your sources.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8847079 Sat, 20 Dec 2003 19:57:15 EDT Re: NOT True!!! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8842166 starstuff :
said by qworster See Profile:

In other words, YOU get punished because of THEIR incompetence to correctly design their network, so it can accommodate the customers THEY sign up!!


Exactly... You've hit the nail right on the head.

Comcast don't want "power users" an ANY cost. Keeping power users means they'll have to upgrade their pipes and the only option is.... fiber.

Comcast only want people that use mail at 1.5Mbps... and next month you'll be able to check your mail at 3Mbps but ONLY mail.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8842166 Sat, 20 Dec 2003 09:02:29 EDT Re: An online meter? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8840715 SaBo7Ge : You pretty much summed up my feeling on the matter as well.. The problem with American Broadband is that unless there's a national broadband policy proposed which goes into effect requiring forced upgrades every couple of years to increase speed and capacity, then most ILEC's or CLEC will hapilly create a stagnant environment for no competition or progress as long as the profits keep rolling on in... It's ashame that the US who should be leading the world is again severely falling behind due to no gov't intervention defining a uniform policy for advancement..]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8840715 Sat, 20 Dec 2003 01:01:02 EDT Re: An online meter? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8839841 JTRockville :
said by Matisaro See Profile:
They are only sending letters to people above 100 gigs or more, this is the kind of fear tactic this news report is ment to instill, I dont want comcast to set a hardcap cause it will be far less than the softcap is now.


Can you provide a link for that limit, or are you just guessing?

It's not necessary for Comcast to change the cap in order to disclose it, unless they're ashamed of it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8839841 Fri, 19 Dec 2003 23:19:02 EDT Re: An online meter? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8838328 bucknerm : Comcast’s policy has proven most controversial. The company’s terms of service say only that users cannot “represent (in the sole judgment of Comcast) an unusually large burden on the network.” According to a spokeswoman, the company began sending notes about two months ago to the top 1 percent of the heaviest users—people who collectively use about 28 percent of the company’s bandwidth—telling them they were violating their terms of service.

Eder said there was no specific line crossed by these subscribers, but she added that some of those people were downloading the equivalent of 90 movies in a given month.

Insert from press release]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8838328 Fri, 19 Dec 2003 20:35:31 EDT Re: An online meter? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8838319 fuzydice : Comcast is almost doubling everyone's download speeds (everyone should see the speeds by January) ...what few people realize is that Comcast isn't spending a dime on more bandwidth to allow for these new speeds. They dont need to: sending letters to people who use their connections as opposed to the many who don't (or use it for email & surfing) is a great way to remove strain on the network. However, paying $60/mo to check your email and surf the web at dsl speeds isn't worth it. When the speeds get to everyone eventually (not everyone has power cycled their modems in the areas that have the new download cap of 3.3mbits) they're going to be looking at an intensely overcrowded network that cant handle 1/3 of the people on it... and guess how many more letters are going to go out? Going over the "soft cap" will be as easy as downloading a couple divx movies in a month, or listening to streaming audio/video for a few hours each week. I can see 1gb a day caps in the next 6 months..... and this is the "soft cap" you want to keep so badly.

Away from my prophecies and more to the situation at hand, a "soft cap" can be as generous and brutal as Comcast wants. A "hard cap" can be as generous or brutal as the CUSTOMER ALLOWS. They drop a hard cap at 1gb/day max in both directions and watch the customers flock to DSL & Satellite. They'll be out of business. Instead, why not drop a soft cap slowly lower and lower until only the people with a brain, about 20% of comcasts customer base, realize the tactic and leave. Now, comcast retains a good portion of their idiot customers who barely clock in more 100mb a day, and they get to brag that "we're twice as fast as dsl!" and they'd be correct in that advertisement, because there's no traffic on their unused network. This also means they wouldn't have to perform any upgrades for several years, as long as the idiots dont realize how they're being ripped off. "Cha-ching" for Comcast!

The same tactic worked for the RIAA and music labels for many many years and probably always will, now Comcast is cashing in on the stupidity of Americans. Shit, why not? Idiot Americans spend a lot of money.

-fuzy
--
[referring to the RIAA...] These guys buy congress people like M&Ms]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8838319 Fri, 19 Dec 2003 20:34:37 EDT Re: An online meter? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8837684 dvd536 :
said by averagedude See Profile:
This gets back to the old argument charge for "quantity" downloaded, or charge for "bandwidth".

My personal opinion is to charge for bandwidth. Then to "choke" or "throttle" down the "flow" if a user abuses. Example, if a person downloads in excess of of 1.5 gig a day, slow there connection down to something like 128. That still is a fair download speed, but at least they are not "terminated"
They should take lessons from cablevision. they are very GOOD at throttling people not for downloading but uploading and their threshold is nowhere near 100gb.
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8837684 Fri, 19 Dec 2003 19:24:20 EDT Re: An online meter? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8836787 starstuff :
said by averagedude See Profile:
This gets back to the old argument charge for "quantity" downloaded, or charge for "bandwidth".
.
.
.
MThat still is a fair download speed, but at least they are not "terminated"


Interesting approach, it could work. I'm sure comcast have discussed that option before but that doesn't eliminate the problem... the "bandwidth hog". Using this approach the bandwidth hog lives another day just to come back tomorrow.

Looks like comcast don't want power users and want their accounts terminated leaving them in search of another isp. Unfortunately for some of them comcast is the only option.

I used to pay 179/mo for my DSL. SBC reduced the price to 159/mo without me asking for it. I have no caps, no limits, 5 static ips, 4800+ down and 520 Kbps up. Why can't comcast do the same? Charge power users 50 or 100 or 150/mo I'm sure some users will gladly pay for an enhanced service.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8836787 Fri, 19 Dec 2003 17:57:40 EDT Re: An online meter? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8836363 averagedude : This gets back to the old argument charge for "quantity" downloaded, or charge for "bandwidth".

My personal opinion is to charge for bandwidth. Then to "choke" or "throttle" down the "flow" if a user abuses. Example, if a person downloads in excess of of 1.5 gig a day, slow there connection down to something like 128. That still is a fair download speed, but at least they are not "terminated"]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8836363 Fri, 19 Dec 2003 17:11:13 EDT Re: An online meter? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8836260 J D McDorce :
said by Matisaro See Profile:
The aup states that comcast can terminate your service at any time for any reason, its pretty clear they can allready and you agreed to it when you took their service.
For clarification, Comcast's AUP indicates that they can terminate your service at any time for violating the TOS / AUP. Comcast's Subscriber Agreement indicates that they can terminate your service upon 30 days notice for any other reason.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8836260 Fri, 19 Dec 2003 17:00:58 EDT Re: An online meter? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8836062 moonpuppy :
said by Matisaro See Profile:


They are only sending letters to people above 100 gigs or more, this is the kind of fear tactic this news report is ment to instill, I dont want comcast to set a hardcap cause it will be far less than the softcap is now.

Keep it up vocal minority, ruin it for everyone else, selfish.


If anyone is being selfish, it is Comcast by playing this little hide the limit game. We won't ruin it, Comcast will do that all on its own. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8836062 Fri, 19 Dec 2003 16:36:56 EDT NOT True!!! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8835775 qworster : The limit is NOT 100 Gigs or more. I know of at least two people who have been shut off for downloading 30-40 gigs/month over a two month period. The reason the limit is "flexible" is because it depends on how subscribed (oversubscribed?) the node you happen to be on is. If you're fortunate to be on a lightly subscribed node, there's NO LIMIT. If you happen to be on a highly subscribed one, your limit might be as low as 30-35 gigs in a month! I got this info straight from a Comcast employee who posted it on Slashdot last week. The people you call at Comcast don't have an absolute limit by the way, nor do they know the 'soft limit' for your node. All they can do be is be: "Dr. NO monkeys", who repeat the company line ad nauseum...

In other words, YOU get punished because of THEIR incompetence to correctly design their network, so it can accommodate the customers THEY sign up!!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8835775 Fri, 19 Dec 2003 16:07:55 EDT Re: An online meter? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8835606 starstuff :
said by Matisaro See Profile:

They are only sending letters to people above 100 gigs or more...


One person that was terminated downloaded 60G in one month. That is way below the 100G that you say.

People should be allowed to download whatever they want. If comcast wants to charge more for heavy use let them charge more. The problem is not charging more or less, the problem is that the technology is reaching it's limits and cable companies don't have a clear upgrade path/strategy to accommodate more users. Like the article said "1% of users are using 28% of bandwidth" and "6% of users are using 78% of the bandwidth"

Comcast is just waiting for somebody else to lay the fiber and then use it... much like MCI and AT&T in 1982.
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8835606 Fri, 19 Dec 2003 15:49:54 EDT Re: An online meter? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8835359 vic102482 :
said by Agent 86:

Isn't it far more likely that if this practice is publicized, Comcast will DROP the cap, since their competitors don't have one, and a "hard cap" would put them at a disadvantage?


I guess you are a cox sucker;)

Just look at what cox has done and you will have your answer. The poster you responded to is correct, the caps will probably be set to 40 or 60 a month if they hardline it.
--
I tie a rope around my penis and jump from a tree, don't you wanna grow up to be just like me!!!!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8835359 Fri, 19 Dec 2003 15:19:56 EDT Re: An online meter? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8835210 Matisaro :
quote:
That's the dumbest thing I've ever read...you like knowing that your connection may be terminated at any time, without any explaination?

Isn't it far more likely that if this practice is publicized, Comcast will DROP the cap, since their competitors don't have one, and a "hard cap" would put them at a disadvantage?


The aup states that comcast can terminate your service at any time for any reason, its pretty clear they can allready and you agreed to it when you took their service.

As far as removing the cap, cox was in this SAME situation and when this crap happened(overblown news reports and fear tactics by the abusers) they set a 30 gig cap, why would comcast be any different, the user base and technology is the same?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8835210 Fri, 19 Dec 2003 14:59:54 EDT Re: An online meter? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8835129 anon : "They are only sending letters to people above 100 gigs or more, this is the kind of fear tactic this news report is ment to instill, I dont want comcast to set a hardcap cause it will be far less than the softcap is now."

That's the dumbest thing I've ever read...you like knowing that your connection may be terminated at any time, without any explaination?

Isn't it far more likely that if this practice is publicized, Comcast will DROP the cap, since their competitors don't have one, and a "hard cap" would put them at a disadvantage?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8835129 Fri, 19 Dec 2003 14:50:18 EDT Re: An online meter? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8834944 Matisaro :
quote:
have used a max of 29gb in one month, which included many linux iso's(latest and greatest distro's)...and some other *stuff....my average month is about 10-15gb...and that includes grabbing maybe an iso(700mb) a month....


They are only sending letters to people above 100 gigs or more, this is the kind of fear tactic this news report is ment to instill, I dont want comcast to set a hardcap cause it will be far less than the softcap is now.

Keep it up vocal minority, ruin it for everyone else, selfish.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8834944 Fri, 19 Dec 2003 14:27:31 EDT Re: An online meter? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8834825 daniyel : I use Comcrap Cable...and have been using an app called vnstat on my linux router to monitor bandwidth...

I have used a max of 29gb in one month, which included many linux iso's(latest and greatest distro's)...and some other *stuff....my average month is about 10-15gb...and that includes grabbing maybe an iso(700mb) a month....

If comcast is gonna be dumb and say "your using to much"...thats fine....DSL sounds good to me, and is going to be within firing distance soon when I move to another location :)

Cable's sucking these days...GO DSL]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8834825 Fri, 19 Dec 2003 14:11:04 EDT An online meter? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8834672 SBC ST : If they want to restrict usage by limiting how much you can download, there should be an account page customers can go to and see where they are at. And if the consumer wants more or unlimited service they could then have the option to purchase additional services. Keeping in mind if the service provider who does this will probably loose customers for selling such a metered service. (Go DSL!)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8834672 Fri, 19 Dec 2003 13:51:05 EDT