republican-creole
site Search:


 
   
story category
802.11ac: Gigabit Wi-Fi coming your way
Theoretical Max Throughput Heads to 1.3 Gbps
by ryan711 Monday 30-Jul-2012 tags: business · wireless · hardware · alternatives · bandwidth · wireless
Although it may seem like just yesterday that the final specification 802.11n devices started rolling out, there is already another Wi-Fi specification right around the corner, 802.11ac. As of current specifications, 802.11ac provides wireless throughput rates of at least 1Gbps. However, recently announced devices from Netgear promise theoretical rates of 1.3Gbps. All of this is in comparison to 802.11n, which tops out at a maximum throughput of 450Mbps.

Click for full size
802.11ac, in contrast to 802.11n, uses only the 5 GHz band. This is done because the 2.4 GHz band cannot support the bandwidth required for the 802.11ac specification. 2.4 GHz has only three non-overlapping 20 MHz wide channels in its Wi-Fi specification: 1, 6, and 11. 802.11ac’s newfound throughput comes from using 80 MHz channels as opposed to 802.11n’s maximum of 40 MHz (and even that 40 MHz can cause problems on the 2.4 GHz frequency).

Click for full size
The move to the 5 GHz frequency allows for the use of those 80 MHz wide channels to provide the aforementioned throughput rate of 1.3Gbps. There is also the possibility for using 160 MHz wide channels to provide up to 2.6Gbps throughput rate. However, it remains to be seen if using channels that wide will come with some of the same limitations of using the 40 MHz wide ones with 802.11n.

The benefits of faster throughputs don’t just stop at being able to transfer large files quickly across your wireless network or streaming heavy HD content to devices because let’s face it, if that were the case, most people would be content with their current 802.11n setups. Allowing more bandwidth means that there will be less interference overall resulting in more effective coverage and less dead zones.

Click for full size
Netgear is also including a technology called “Beamforming” with their draft 802.11ac device. Beamforming simply means that instead of the wireless signal transmitting in an omnidirectional pattern at all times, it will intelligently direct the signal toward a device.

As was stated earlier, Netgear is preparing to launch the first 802.11ac wireless router in the second half of 2012. The good news? It will be backward compatible with 802.11n at the 5 GHz band. The bad news? There are no receiving devices on the market yet meaning you won’t be able to take advantage of that new speed until there are devices such as phones, etc. that have the new 802.11ac chipset inside. The retail price of Netgear’s new device is set at $199.99.

Keep in mind though that early 802.11n draft devices were not compatible with the final specification. I know many people that got burnt buying pre-draft 802.11n devices because they thought that they could be upgraded when the final specification came out. Just something to keep in mind.

This article is part of an effort to solicit paid content from the Broadband Reports community. If you'd like to participate, please contact us.

view: topics flat text 
Post a:

aaronwt
Premium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

1 edit

I'm not going to jump in this time..

When draft wireless N came out I got several devices that used it. But I'm not going to jump on draft 802.11ac devices. At one point I was using five APs along with multiple bridges. And I recently replaced my aging Dlink DGL4500 router. I thought about getting the recently released Asus 802.11 AC router(RT-AC66U) but when I thought about it, it just didn't make much sense. The router was much more expensive, plus I would need Bridges that would be equally expensive.

So I went with the ASUS RT-N56U router which with it's guest Wifi access allowed me to eliminate a couple my Access Points. I still get great speed from my Wi-Fi devices but since I run gigabit wired connection, my fastest devices just get a wired giagbit connection.
Besides, when will 802.11AC get ratified and when with devices with native support for it be released? I won't think about going to 802.11AC until that happens.

djrobx

join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·VOIPo
·Verizon Wireless..
·RoadRunner Cable
·AT&T U-Verse

Re: I'm not going to jump in this time..

Lets just hope they ratify a standard quicker than they did with "n".

I wonder what actual throughput rates will be. Actual wireless throughput speeds tend to be somewhere between 1/3 to 1/2 of advertised.

»Actual N Throughput
--
AT&T U-Hearse - RIP Unlimited Internet 1995-2011
Rethink Billable.

Linklist
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5

Re: I'm not going to jump in this time..

said by djrobx:

Lets just hope they ratify a standard quicker than they did with "n".

I wonder what actual throughput rates will be. Actual wireless throughput speeds tend to be somewhere between 1/3 to 1/2 of advertised.

»Actual N Throughput

I get about 100mbps out of a claimed 300mbps max rate on my Netgear 5GHZ 802.11n channels. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see real throughput rates on 802.11ac at 1/4 of the claimed 1gbps.
--
»www.mittromney.com/s/repeal-and-···bamacare
»www.mittromney.com/issues/health-care
NefCanuck

join:2007-06-26
Mississauga, ON
Reviews:
·voip.ms

Re: I'm not going to jump in this time..

said by Linklist:

said by djrobx:

Lets just hope they ratify a standard quicker than they did with "n".

I wonder what actual throughput rates will be. Actual wireless throughput speeds tend to be somewhere between 1/3 to 1/2 of advertised.

»Actual N Throughput

I get about 100mbps out of a claimed 300mbps max rate on my Netgear 5GHZ 802.11n channels. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see real throughput rates on 802.11ac at 1/4 of the claimed 1gbps.

and unless you have a lot of wireless connected devices that are run simultaneously could you even manage to saturate one 1/4 of this theoretical 1.3Gbps connection?

Maybe if you have a FIOS connection and are using it to support 4+ wireless devices (with at least one needing HD content bandwidth) otherwise, at least for consumers, I can't see the upside in jumping to this draft spec at this time, esp. with all the people that got burned on the pre draft N devices.

NefCanuck
elefante72

join:2010-12-03
East Amherst, NY
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·Verizon FiOS
·voip.ms

Re: I'm not going to jump in this time..

Only 3 channels and crapping on my 5Ghz networks now. Nobody uses 5GHZ in my neighborhood, so I get beautiful streaming. Once this comes in the 20 2.4ghz over 3 channels is going to be a nightmare. And beamforming can only help so much with all of these overlapping signals and if people deploy ones w/ OPTIONAL BF even better So even if I get the Ferrari AP my neighbor gets the Yugo spilling all over me....

Should be a joy getting the same speed and upgrading gear
cramer

join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:7

Re: I'm not going to jump in this time..

What are you babbling about? 11ac is a 5GHZ ONLY system as there isn't 80MHz in the 2.4GHz ISM band. 5GHz has plenty of channels, and NONE of them overlap. Granted, cordless phones, video cameras, and baby monitors will be the most likely sources of problems. (they aren't WiFi and they don't look for any signal before stomping all over it.)

Linklist
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5
said by NefCanuck:

and unless you have a lot of wireless connected devices that are run simultaneously could you even manage to saturate one 1/4 of this theoretical 1.3Gbps connection?

Maybe if you have a FIOS connection and are using it to support 4+ wireless devices (with at least one needing HD content bandwidth) otherwise, at least for consumers, I can't see the upside in jumping to this draft spec at this time, esp. with all the people that got burned on the pre draft N devices.

NefCanuck

My internet connection tops out at about 26mbps download. But the speeds I refer to are for Lan-to-Lan connections. Moving large files from a laptop to a central file server and the other way.
--
»www.mittromney.com/s/repeal-and-···bamacare
»www.mittromney.com/issues/health-care
BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH

Re: I'm not going to jump in this time..

Exactly. Even computer to computer, it's great for moving files around.
openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2
How about bridging HTPCs? Improve LAN without stringing CAT5e/CAT6 everywhere? There are benefits and you don't need a Gbps connection into your home. Personally, when the standard is more solid and the hardware is proven, I'll probably upgrade my 802.11n network to make it easier to push media files around my house. The ~80 Mbps I get now is nice, but doubling/tripling that would be a nice improvement.
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ

Re: I'm not going to jump in this time..

well I mean I would love a Gbps internet link... but since I am not in KC that wont happen...

back on topic, you are right about HTPCs. Wireless N can choke on 1080p video. and as home servers become more common and streaming to the TV via many devices from HTPCs to gaming consoles. The ability to move uncompressed HD at 1080p will be required, at least when dealing with video stored locally.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports
BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH
That would still be great, as going cross-platform, my computers seem to max out around 300mbps on wired gigabit, so when I move and I can't have wired gigabit, I could still get 200+mbps, which would be really nice.

elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium
join:2006-08-30
HarperLand
Reviews:
·Cybersurf Intern..
said by djrobx:

Lets just hope they ratify a standard quicker than they did with "n".

I wonder what actual throughput rates will be. Actual wireless throughput speeds tend to be somewhere between 1/3 to 1/2 of advertised.

»Actual N Throughput

It's supposed to be ratified by Feb of 2013. Everybody is on board, that's why you are seeing "draft" AC products coming out.
--
No, I didn't. Honest... I ran out of gas. I... I had a flat tire. I didn't have enough money for cab fare. My tux didn't come back from the cleaners. An old friend came in from out of town. Someone stole my car. There was an earthquake.......

Jim Kirk
Premium
join:2005-12-09
said by djrobx:

Lets just hope they ratify a standard quicker than they did with "n".

I wonder what actual throughput rates will be. Actual wireless throughput speeds tend to be somewhere between 1/3 to 1/2 of advertised.

»Actual N Throughput

»www.smallnetbuilder.com/wireless···l-review
nanaki333

join:2010-08-11
Chantilly, VA
Reviews:
·MegaPath
·Verizon FiOS

they're already out to buy

»www.newegg.com/Product/ProductLi···hInDesc=

thegeek
Premium
join:2008-02-21
right here
kudos:2

802.11g

I'm still rockin' 802.11g. I can't bare to get rid of my old WRT54G v2.1.

Kickrox
Premium
join:2002-08-18
Brooklyn, NY

Re: 802.11g

Yep same here.

One's running Tomato and the other DD-WRT and both are reliable workhorses.
nanaki333

join:2010-08-11
Chantilly, VA
oh i agree. N's range even sucks. i use G wherever possible

John Galt
Forward, March
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp
kudos:5

Re: 802.11g

said by nanaki333:

oh i agree. N's range even sucks. i use G wherever possible

For a given amount of power, the range of N will always be less than that of G.

buddahbless

join:2005-03-21
Premium
Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
·Verizon Online DSL
·Comcast
·T-Mobile US

Re: 802.11g

Agreed.. on my home/ home office network I use a G router for my business connections and a N router for the home network connections being that it better supports DLNA ( I use a switch after my modem but before the routers). Yes My G may be slower but it does have better range.
cramer

join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:7
You have that backwards. 802.11n was designed to increase range at the same power.

Unfortunately, you are confusing range with poor design. Most (all?) manufacturers 11n models use less power and a smaller, internal (read: cheap crap) antenna; the result is less range; the 11g range suffers as well. Plus, one must take great care to get a 40MHz (wide) channel as anything else using the same channels will cause it to drop to 20MHz -- and your speed and range will suffer. The 5GHz band is much less likely to have that problem, but the shorter wavelength naturally does not go as far. (it gets absorbed by most objects.)
hrickpa

join:2001-06-07
Reading, PA
Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL

802.11A

Happy with stability with 802.11A 5 Ghz where I live. there are too many 802.11B/G 2.4 Ghz routers around causing with stability issues with B/g. Neighbors has a 802.11n router using all of the channels at once

I am using three Linksys WAP55AG ver.2's with B/G disabled, only using the802.11A only. I have one per floor old Rowe House


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:20

Re: 802.11A

802.11n and 802.11ac both support the 5 GHz spectrum, so there is no reason to be using 802.11a anymore. The key, however, is that you need 802.11n devices that support 5 GHz (example, the iPad 3 is the only iDevice to support 5 GHz), but that should be much more common than 802.11a support (which generally today is only found in 5GHz 802.11n products anyhow).

Basically, if you've got a 5 GHz 802.11n device on the 5 GHz spectrum, you're doing nothing but losing performance/reliability by using it in 802.11a mode.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org

John Galt
Forward, March
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp
kudos:5

Re: 802.11A

My iPad2 does 5GHz just fine...
dbc

join:2002-03-06
Cliffside Park, NJ

Re: 802.11A

Mine as well. I have the Zyxel (NBG5715) and it makes the comparable Net Gear (WNDR4500) router look like a hunk of junk. I see that Asus has come out with something in the class of the two aforementioned routers. Not sure how good it is. Anyway, my IPAD 2 is always able to hit 450 mbps on the 5 ghz stream with my Zyxel router. I have a Gateway Laptop with Intel's Ultimate N633 Wireless Card and that also hits 450 mbps on the 5 ghz stream regularly. Range is solid too, better than I thought it would be.
tmc8080

join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY
Reviews:
·ooma
·Optimum Online
·Verizon FiOS

portable adapter interface sucks

Why bother making 802.11ac with USB 2.0?
Either make it with USB 3.0 or gigabit ethernet port or dont' make it at all! Just like making hard drives with usb 2.0... you'll only get 60MB throughput.. which is lame. many m/b's now have esata... you could even use esata for the throughput...

Until they get portable device interface right 802.11 AC will just be an overpriced novelty niche..

morbo
Complete Your Transaction

join:2002-01-22
00000

When will the spec be finalized?

When do we expect the draft to be finalized?

tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Comcast

There are no receiving devices on the market yet...

....meaning you won’t be able to take advantage of that new speed until there are devices such as phones, etc. that have the new 802.11ac chipset inside.
you are blasting bits off in to the ether at truely amazing speeds, and nobody can prove you're not. so why stop at 1.3 Gb, why not claim up to 85Gb, it doesn't matter you aren't getting those bits back anyway.

In fact, there isn't much point at taking it out of the box yet, should you be dumb enough to buy.

beamforming might help, out where I live, with limited neighbors, but once you get a few dozen of these in an apt complex no one will see full speed for long as the available channels become totally saturated.
Kamus

join:2011-01-27
El Paso, TX

Re: There are no receiving devices on the market yet...

said by tshirt:

In fact, there isn't much point at taking it out of the box yet, should you be dumb enough to buy.

beamforming might help, out where I live, with limited neighbors, but once you get a few dozen of these in an apt complex no one will see full speed for long as the available channels become totally saturated.

Wrong, on everything.

First off, while it's very expensive to get the benefit from 802.11ac right now. Aside from price, there's nothing stopping anyone from buying another router to use as a bridge, or a bridge. (Buffalo sells one already)

And i think you have no idea how beam-forming works. The signal itself doesn't propagate as a "beam" all of a sudden because of it. So interference wouldn't really go away.

However, you are still wrong about the apt. complex example. Not because of beam-forming, but because of the 5ghz spectrum. there's a lot more channels available for 802.11ac that don't overlap.
Something not possible with wireless N at 2.4 ghz because there's basically only 2 channels to choose from to get full speed (40mhz channels), and only two of those channels don't overlap.

Or more realistically, 3 channels since the scenarios to run 40mhz width on 2.4 are almost non-existent.

So you get 3 channels to choose from, of course this is going to cause huge interference issues. (1, 6 and 11 for those wondering)
But with ac there's a lot more bandwidth available, so there's also more channels to choose from.

So, if you are living in an apt complex it wouldn't be too hard to setup your WiFi on non overlapping channels, you'd have to sacrifice some raw speed, but at least there won't be interference.
you can get either:
9 channels to choose from that don't overlap @20Mhz, 4@40Mhz, 2 @80Mhz or even 1@160Mhz

As you can imagine, while this won't completely solve interference problems. But crowded places will fare a LOT better than they did before.

tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Comcast

Re: There are no receiving devices on the market yet...

Yes I understand the idea of bridging.
The section I struck was a quote from the story.

My point was time after time with each standard companies began releasing "draft" products to end users GUARANTEEING that they would work fine or be upgradeable to the final standard, and few were totally compatible, quite a few never performed as advertised, missed out on important features, and most of the GUARANTEES were worthless. worse some of the early Draft models turned of to be the source of interference/channel pollution, but could not be withdrawn from the market.
Those that worked "pretty well" even with some limitations were fine for use as el cheapo routers/APs (in fact lots of draft 'n' are available on "last chance" electronics sites for under $15 right now)
But non really met the "fully compliant, 100% upgradable, all bells and whisles hype, and the same will MOST LIKELY be true of draft A/C units.
No great hurry IMHO
Kamus

join:2011-01-27
El Paso, TX

If you need the speed, no need to wait.

Reading from various sources it seems that the "draft" routers should be fully compatible with the final specification.
Seems vendors learned from their past mistakes and this time around there's like no chance draft routers being different from the final routers.

Unless of course we're talking about price... that's a very different story.
These things are very expensive and if you need the speed the only way to get a radio on the client is to get a bridge anyway, at which point if your client has an Ethernet port you might want to consider running cables instead.

Of course if it really isn't possible to run cables then this would be money very well spent for those devices then.

I'm very tempted on getting one for myself, but it's so hard to justify for me at this point. I'd have to spend around 400 bucks to get the benefit, and for that price i'd be much better off just running a cable since it would only benefit one or two of my clients.

I think i'm going to hold out until n clients become a thing of the past and ac comes standard on everything.
ssavoy
Premium
join:2007-08-16
Dallas, PA
Reviews:
·Comcast

Spectrum Efficiency

I think what we really need to work on is spectral efficiency. How many people are really going to care about 1.3gbps transfer speeds? Don't get me wrong, it's awesome technology, but WiFi is becoming increasingly crowded. There's no reason for the average Joe to be taking up 40MHz of spectrum on a 3mbit DSL connection in an apartment complex, making the rest of the band less efficient for other users.

Something like having the ability for both the radio and the receivers to automatically use smaller channels depending on load would be better.
tmc8080

join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY
Reviews:
·ooma
·Optimum Online
·Verizon FiOS

Re: Spectrum Efficiency

said by ssavoy:

I think what we really need to work on is spectral efficiency. How many people are really going to care about 1.3gbps transfer speeds? Don't get me wrong, it's awesome technology, but WiFi is becoming increasingly crowded. There's no reason for the average Joe to be taking up 40MHz of spectrum on a 3mbit DSL connection in an apartment complex, making the rest of the band less efficient for other users.

Something like having the ability for both the radio and the receivers to automatically use smaller channels depending on load would be better.

No worries.. half the computers (desktop/laptops) out there don't even have gigabit ethernet ports (or USB 3.0).. only 10/100! Even as competitive wireline companies make 100+ megabits internet available.. it's not even quite affordable to justify buying at the residential consumer for a long time to come (4 years out) barring some miraculous 180 deg. turn by the top 3 ISPs..

This technology has room for the dust to settle and computers to be upgraded to have the latest communications ports such as usb 3.0 & multi gigabit ethernet-- I think 10gigE will be the next cards to come down from $200+ to maybe $40 so that they can be integrated into the next generation of motherboards. Being an early adopter is a waste of good money. It made iphone lemmings part with hundreds of millions of dollars from 2009 - 2012. These 802.11ac makers aren't even hyping the tech yet, they know it's beta crap... so don't drink the koolaid just yet, afterall your not drowning in it yet..
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
Routers really should at power up do automatic site surveys. and select the least used channels as it is right now you see lots of crowding because how many people even know what a channel is other than the thing they change on their TV set.

if it was not for the worry of an FCC fine and my devices likely not working with it.. I would set my DD-WRT to channel 13.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports

Smith6612
Premium,MVM
join:2008-02-01
North Tonawanda, NY
kudos:22

Re: Spectrum Efficiency

Most routers are starting to come with site survey functions in them, however they are often buggy and result in more problems than they're worth at times.
openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2
said by ssavoy:

There's no reason for the average Joe to be taking up 40MHz of spectrum on a 3mbit DSL connection in an apartment complex, making the rest of the band less efficient for other users.

What about moving data around your LAN? Not everything has to come from the Internet.
floydb1982

join:2004-08-25
Kent, WA
Reviews:
·Clearwire Wireless
·Comcast

1 edit

I got rid of Wi-Fi for good.

I have the Belkin N750 DB wireless router and I have the Wi-Fi on the router turned off because I simple never use it. I switched from using 100ft Ethernet cord to Powerline AV. I use the Netgear Powerline AV 200 and the Netgear Powerline AV 500. It's like traveling at maximum warp speed in space on the U.S.S Enterprise D. The setup I have in the dinning room is Comcast> Motorola Docsis 3.0 cable modem> Belkin N750 DB wireless router> Netgear Powerline AV XAVB5001 adapter. In mamas bedroom she uses the Netgear Powerline AV XAVB2001 In my bedroom on the left corner Magnavox 47" 1080/60Hz 1080p LCD TV> Netgear NeoTV NTV200> Netgear Powerline AV 200 XAV2001. In the backer center wall of my room my computer is plugged into the Netgear Powerline AV XAVB5001.
floydb1982

join:2004-08-25
Kent, WA
Reviews:
·Clearwire Wireless
·Comcast

No broadband such speeds at 1Gbps in the USA.

What is the point of using the 802.11ac wireless gigabyte connection when the fact is that no broadband provider in the USA is offering such speeds. Not even wireless 4G can do such speeds.

Wireless N 450Mbps is way faster than even the fastest broadband speed offered in the USA. Wireless G 54MHz is still way faster than most broadband providers in the USA. it's just now worth it to us 802.11ac when the simple fact is you'll never reach such speeds on the internet in the USA.

Another thing is that there is Powerline AV 200 and Powerline AV 500 networking. With Powerline AN network you can turn any AC wall outlet in your house or office building in to an internet by just using one Powerline AV adapter connected to your DSL, Cable, or optical fiber modems. Then can go to any outlet and AC wall outlet and hook yourself up to the internet. It's just that simple.

aaronwt
Premium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

Re: No broadband such speeds at 1Gbps in the USA.

said by floydb1982:

What is the point of using the 802.11ac wireless gigabyte connection when the fact is that no broadband provider in the USA is offering such speeds. Not even wireless 4G can do such speeds.

Wireless N 450Mbps is way faster than even the fastest broadband speed offered in the USA. Wireless G 54MHz is still way faster than most broadband providers in the USA. it's just now worth it to us 802.11ac when the simple fact is you'll never reach such speeds on the internet in the USA.

..................

You still use wireless to connect with all the devices internally in the home. It's not just about your connection to the outside world.
donaldweaver

join:2012-08-23

Great Reviews... Should I bite?

Your post was great, and informative. I have also read some excellent reviews on this... I am thinking of putting Wifi in our house, and I figure if I am going to do that then I should set it up the fastest I could get it.

Lots of wireless routers out there, so I started doing some research and found that 802.11n is currently the latest, but 802.11ac will be much faster.

Here is where I am confused, the 802.11ac certification won’t be issued till early 2013, yet I am seeing 802.11ac on the market claiming they are 802.11ac – even though they can’t be ‘Wi-Fi CERTIFIED’ since the 11ac certification isn’t finalized yet.

Some of the reviews of these first 802.11ac product mention that they are based on a first draft of the 802.11ac spec, and might have some performance issues with products that are based on the final 802.11ac spec

From what I read, the ‘Wi-Fi CERTIFIED’ certification makes sure that the devices will be fully compatible and function correctly with other 11ac products. The just released 802.11ac routers from several manufactures don’t have the Wi-Fi Certification.

I feel it is best to wait on 802.11ac, since I have waited this long, another 6 month shouldn’t kill me.

Am I crazy for wanting to wait till early next year to buy an 802.11ac router?

Thursday, 23-May 16:58:15 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 13.5 years online © 1999-2013 dslreports.com.