PlusNet have a cut-off time on ADSL. It's NOT an always on service
Stephen Dean
The bandwidth restrictions are in place to enable us to maintain a balanced
service to the majority and ensure that their ADSL service is protected from
those who would view the ADSL service as the same as having private circuit
connection. ADSL is not intended to be a permanantly used connection i.e. to
be used for downloading files 24hrs a day, its is not costed that way or
built that way.
ADSL is an "always-on" service and the semantics used to describe us as
saying that it is "only a fast service" is just a play on words and has been
completely mis-reported. Those of you who know about ADSL will know that is
not a permanent connection - just "always-on" - since it uses a dial-up
connection and can re-connect in a matter of micro-seconds - with the TCP/IP
control stack being able to account for the data loss during this
disconnection time and the data be re-requested in time for transfers to be
continued without error - thereby giving the "effect" of being a permanent
connection.
We offer one of the most competetive ADSL packages on the market today which
together with the contented availability (50:1) our service also offers an
included array of applications which cannot be found with other service
providers elsewhere, and you should also note that the 500MB/day is only for
particular ADSL services and not the whole range, more information on which
can be found at
http://www.plus.net/info/service_overview.html
http://www.plus.net/info/more_info.html#bandwidth
If there is anything else you require clarifying please refer your enquiries
to our support centre via the channels listed on our contacts page at
http://www.plus.net or via our customer feedback section via the link at the
bottom of the page on the main website listed.
Thank You.
--
Kind Regards
--
| Stephen Dean Fixed cost Internet access available @
| Senior Technical Consultant http://www.plus.net
| PlusNet Technologies LTD
+----------"PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet"----------
Paul S. Owen
news:gMeI5.2233$Ms3.114963@stones...
|
| completely mis-reported. Those of you who know about ADSL will know that
is
| not a permanent connection - just "always-on" - since it uses a dial-up
| connection and can re-connect in a matter of micro-seconds
er Stephen I've had ADSL now for several months, can't say I've _ever_ had
to redial. I think you're confusing the USB variant with the ethernet
variant. ADSL is just the enabling technology and it _does_ allow for
_always on_ _permanently connected_, or whatever else you want to class it
as, connections. The fact that BT are being cheap by offering a USB setup
has absolutely nothing to do with this fact. If they or Alcatel so desired
they could write the PPPoA and driver code into a pseudo-NIC driver and you
would never have to knowingly dial.
All you are doing by limiting bandwidth is effectively admitting your core
network is not capable of sustaining the loads you believe will be put upon
it. The solution is not to limit bandwidth but to invest in your
infrastructure as quickly as possible.
--
Paul S. Owen : To reply add .ac.uk to address // ICQ : 42373123
CPSE, ICST&M, London, UK
On the web: http://www.pso-online.com/
Eurofighter Typhoon: http://www.eurofighter.pso-online.com/
Stephen Dean
I was referring to the product which was in dispute at the time - the USB
option. As I said there are other options and information available on these
at the links provided.
Our core network is capable - but we are balancing it for the majority, as
stated. The test of time will tell.
--
Regards
--
| Stephen Dean Fixed cost Internet access available @
| Senior Technical Consultant http://www.plus.net
| PlusNet Technologies LTD
+----------"PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet"----------
"Paul S. Owen" <p.owen@ic> wrote in message
news:972127494.3973.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
Paul S. Owen
|
| I was referring to the product which was in dispute at the time - the USB
| option. As I said there are other options and information available on
these
| at the links provided.
But you're limiting downloads for _all_ services. Since your argument for
doing this on the USB variant is that it's not intended to be an always on
solution surely you apply the same argument for ethernet?
| Our core network is capable - but we are balancing it for the majority,
It's capable but you need to balance it for the good of all? If it's capable
it's capable, you shouldn't need to start limiting bandwidth.
Stephen Dean
bandwidth limitations are there to ensure that everyone gets a fair share.
--
Regards
--
| Stephen Dean Fixed cost Internet access available @
| Senior Technical Consultant http://www.plus.net
| PlusNet Technologies LTD
+----------"PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet"----------
"Paul S. Owen" <p.owen@ic> wrote in message
news:972131457.5354.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
Andrew
wrote:
>Please read the first original paragraph very carefully again - the
>bandwidth limitations are there to ensure that everyone gets a fair share.
So you guarantee that I'll be able use upto the 500MB bandwidth per
day?
Otherwise I'm not getting my fair share...
Andrew
Paul S. Owen
|
| Please read the first original paragraph very carefully again - the
| bandwidth limitations are there to ensure that everyone gets a fair share.
But your network is quote "capable", why do you have to limit downloads to
allow everyone a fair share? If the network is capable of handling the loads
(as it should be through provision of core bandwidth and effective traffic
shaping if required) there should be no reason to limit access.
Stephen Dean
at full bandwidth of 512kbps for 24/7 ?
--
Regards
--
| Stephen Dean Fixed cost Internet access available @
| Senior Technical Consultant http://www.plus.net
| PlusNet Technologies LTD
+----------"PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet"----------
"Paul S. Owen" <p.owen@ic> wrote in message
news:972132978.5952.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
Andrew
wrote:
>What are you going to be downloading that would need you to be downloading
>at full bandwidth of 512kbps for 24/7 ?
The 500MB/day actually works out at 4.6kbps (kilobits per second).
500MB is not that much try this example...
2 hours of streaming video at 80kbps ( Big Brother rates ) = 72MB
Game Demo download of 100MB
Email 300 messages a day, 2MB average, peak of 10MB
Upload of webcam to homepage 10MB
Online gaming 1 hour 12MB
Total so far 204MB adding web and newsgroup downloads and sharing work
files.
This is for one user, share the connection between two home users and
500MB will probably be exceeded several days in a month.
It wont take long, and how do you expect people to monitor this?
Also if someone was to start pinging the connection, i.e. hack
attempts this would count also.
Andrew
G
is not at all funny. When did they impose this limit ? Was it clear when you
signed with them ? Is your signiture on a peice of paper with this limit on
? If not, stick it up their arse and sign with a decent ISP
(A&A,Nildram,Iomart)
ow.Dav. <he...@there.com> wrote in message
news:21o2vssstapmtjojv...@4ax.com...
> OK so I stretched the truth a bit but it is an effective cut-off time
> as PlusNet limit downloads to 500Meg/Day on there ADSL service; if you
> exceed this limit you will be charge more for the service.
>
> They, PlusNet, say themselves that ADSL is *not* an always on service
> but just a *fast* service. This strikes me as flying in the face of
> what everyone else has been saying about ADSL, that it is an "always
> on" service.
>
> Go somewhere else, that does not have download limits, for your ADSL
> supplier.
>
> See the thread "Worrying Precedent"
>
>
> Please visit: http://www.thehungersite.com/ and help save a life.
>
> db.
Paul S. Owen
|
| What are you going to be downloading that would need you to be downloading
| at full bandwidth of 512kbps for 24/7 ?
Example (to add to Andrew's), Mandrake 7.2, three CD's -> Your package would
require to me take over three days to obtain it (and then in bursts ...).
Having used ADSL for several months I can tell you with ease and with
support of the vast vast majority of fellow trialists that you'll be
reaching that limit more than once per week without even realising it.
The point is not "why do you need to download?" but more "why aren't you
allowing it?".
Stephen Dean
--
Regards
--
| Stephen Dean Fixed cost Internet access available @
| Senior Technical Consultant http://www.plus.net
| PlusNet Technologies LTD
+----------"PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet"----------
"Andrew" <ne...@farina.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:39f1992c...@news.demon.co.uk...
> On Sat, 21 Oct 2000 14:04:10 +0100, "Stephen Dean" <sd...@plus.net>
> wrote:
>
> >What are you going to be downloading that would need you to be
downloading
> >at full bandwidth of 512kbps for 24/7 ?
>
> The 500MB/day actually works out at 4.6kbps (kilobits per second).
>
10:1 contention ratio - not bad
> 500MB is not that much try this example...
>
> 2 hours of streaming video at 80kbps ( Big Brother rates ) = 72MB
> Game Demo download of 100MB
> Email 300 messages a day, 2MB average, peak of 10MB
> Upload of webcam to homepage 10MB
> Online gaming 1 hour 12MB
>
> Total so far 204MB adding web and newsgroup downloads and sharing work
> files.
>
2/5ths of the allowance per day ... 3/5ths to go
> This is for one user, share the connection between two home users and
> 500MB will probably be exceeded several days in a month.
>
It is meant for a single user - not multiple users sharing a "single user"
connection.
> It wont take long, and how do you expect people to monitor this?
>
We can monitor it quite easily thank you.
> Also if someone was to start pinging the connection, i.e. hack
> attempts this would count also.
>
That's what firewalls were built for - catching people who do this. Report
to us with logs/evidence and we will catch up with the improprieter from
there. Ping packets would also not have your ip header and so not be
attributed to your traffic.
> Andrew
>
>
>
Stephen Dean
included in your bandwidth quota.
"why aren't you allowing it?". - again - read paragraph one.
Andrew
>>
>> 2 hours of streaming video at 80kbps ( Big Brother rates ) = 72MB
>> Game Demo download of 100MB
>> Email 300 messages a day, 2MB average, peak of 10MB
>> Upload of webcam to homepage 10MB
>> Online gaming 1 hour 12MB
>>
>> Total so far 204MB adding web and newsgroup downloads and sharing work
>> files.
>>
>
>2/5ths of the allowance per day ... 3/5ths to go
Yes, but that excludes all web surfing, I'd estimate to exceed the
500MB around 2 - 3 times a month if not more. Then if working from
home, that can add 100MB a day in sending zips in emails!!!
>> This is for one user, share the connection between two home users and
>> 500MB will probably be exceeded several days in a month.
>It is meant for a single user - not multiple users sharing a "single user"
>connection.
I asssume you are including the ADSL profession version in this
statement, since it has an ethernet router with hub, and as the router
handles DHCP is perfect for home sharing...
>> It wont take long, and how do you expect people to monitor this?
>We can monitor it quite easily thank you.
And when do you tell a user they've exceeded the quota this is not
clear from the T&C's
>> Also if someone was to start pinging the connection, i.e. hack
>> attempts this would count also.
>That's what firewalls were built for - catching people who do this. Report
>to us with logs/evidence and we will catch up with the improprieter from
>there. Ping packets would also not have your ip header and so not be
>attributed to your traffic.
So if I hosted a small ftp server on the USB version, possible and
people are doing this, the traffic from this wouldnt count, as it
wouldnt have originated from me?
Andrew
Paul S. Owen
|
| Linux ISOs available on the Plusnet File Vault for download
And Microsoft Windows Updates? MSDN? Numerous and various game demos?
Everything on Betanews? Winfiles? Cnet? Unless you've got terrabytes of
constantly updated mirrors online people will have to go outside your
network at some point.
| - which is not
| included in your bandwidth quota.
Well it's not my quota ... personally I would never sign with a company that
limits bandwidth. It generates too many questions in my mind as to bandwidth
available on the core network (or potential lack of it).
| "why aren't you allowing it?". - again - read paragraph one.
And again why are you limiting downloads? The only reason that makes any
sense is your network cannot handle the demand. When SDSL becomes available
are you going to limit uploads as well?
Andrew
>And again why are you limiting downloads? The only reason that makes any
>sense is your network cannot handle the demand. When SDSL becomes available
>are you going to limit uploads as well?
From my reading they are including the upload in this aswell. But only
traffic with your IP Header on it?
Andrew
Stephen Dean
--
Regards
--
| Stephen Dean Fixed cost Internet access available @
| Senior Technical Consultant http://www.plus.net
| PlusNet Technologies LTD
+----------"PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet"----------
"Andrew" <ne...@farina.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:39f1a24d...@news.demon.co.uk...
> >> 500MB is not that much try this example...
> >>
> >> 2 hours of streaming video at 80kbps ( Big Brother rates ) = 72MB
> >> Game Demo download of 100MB
> >> Email 300 messages a day, 2MB average, peak of 10MB
> >> Upload of webcam to homepage 10MB
> >> Online gaming 1 hour 12MB
> >>
> >> Total so far 204MB adding web and newsgroup downloads and sharing work
> >> files.
> >>
> >
> >2/5ths of the allowance per day ... 3/5ths to go
>
> Yes, but that excludes all web surfing, I'd estimate to exceed the
> 500MB around 2 - 3 times a month if not more. Then if working from
> home, that can add 100MB a day in sending zips in emails!!!
What websites are you browsing to get 500MB worth of webpages per day ..
some ones with nice large graphics on no doubt. 100Mb in zips in the email
per day .. clever way to send things when it UUencodes it and increases the
size by 1/3rd - not very bandwidth efficient - and are you sending
"graphics" as you are a "webdesigner" in the zips or what else ??
204+100 = 304 ... 200MB worth of webpages left to browse .. thats a lot of
websites.
>
> >> This is for one user, share the connection between two home users and
> >> 500MB will probably be exceeded several days in a month.
> >It is meant for a single user - not multiple users sharing a "single
user"
> >connection.
>
> I asssume you are including the ADSL profession version in this
> statement, since it has an ethernet router with hub, and as the router
> handles DHCP is perfect for home sharing...
>
A single user connection with a lower contention ratio
> >> It wont take long, and how do you expect people to monitor this?
> >We can monitor it quite easily thank you.
>
> And when do you tell a user they've exceeded the quota this is not
> clear from the T&C's
>
Email is a very handy medium and computers are handy for automating things
like sending emails when people go over quota.
> >> Also if someone was to start pinging the connection, i.e. hack
> >> attempts this would count also.
> >That's what firewalls were built for - catching people who do this.
Report
> >to us with logs/evidence and we will catch up with the improprieter from
> >there. Ping packets would also not have your ip header and so not be
> >attributed to your traffic.
>
> So if I hosted a small ftp server on the USB version, possible and
> people are doing this, the traffic from this wouldnt count, as it
> wouldnt have originated from me?
>
"and so not be attributed to your traffic."
> Andrew
Stephen Dean
--
Regards
--
| Stephen Dean Fixed cost Internet access available @
| Senior Technical Consultant http://www.plus.net
| PlusNet Technologies LTD
+----------"PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet"----------
"Paul S. Owen" <p.owen@ic> wrote in message
news:972137918.7913.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
> "Stephen Dean" <sd...@plus.net> wrote in message
> news:3bhI5.2294$Ms3.120193@stones...
> |
> | Linux ISOs available on the Plusnet File Vault for download
>
> And Microsoft Windows Updates? MSDN? Numerous and various game demos?
> Everything on Betanews? Winfiles? Cnet? Unless you've got terrabytes of
> constantly updated mirrors online people will have to go outside your
> network at some point.
>
Your looking at mirroring these yourself each then ?
> | - which is not
> | included in your bandwidth quota.
>
> Well it's not my quota ... personally I would never sign with a company
that
> limits bandwidth. It generates too many questions in my mind as to
bandwidth
> available on the core network (or potential lack of it).
>
Your choice.
> | "why aren't you allowing it?". - again - read paragraph one.
>
> And again why are you limiting downloads? The only reason that makes any
> sense is your network cannot handle the demand. When SDSL becomes
available
> are you going to limit uploads as well?
>
The fibre can handle it.
SDSL uploads - when the time comes we will cross that one.
Stephen Dean
--
Regards
--
| Stephen Dean Fixed cost Internet access available @
| Senior Technical Consultant http://www.plus.net
| PlusNet Technologies LTD
+----------"PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet"----------
"Andrew" <ne...@farina.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:39f1a8ef...@news.demon.co.uk...
> On Sat, 21 Oct 2000 15:18:34 +0100, "Paul S. Owen" <p.owen@ic> wrote:
>
> >And again why are you limiting downloads? The only reason that makes any
> >sense is your network cannot handle the demand. When SDSL becomes
available
> >are you going to limit uploads as well?
>
Andrew
wrote:
>What websites are you browsing to get 500MB worth of webpages per day ..
>some ones with nice large graphics on no doubt. 100Mb in zips in the email
>per day .. clever way to send things when it UUencodes it and increases the
>size by 1/3rd - not very bandwidth efficient - and are you sending
>"graphics" as you are a "webdesigner" in the zips or what else ??
I dont have to disclose this, but web browsing can account for around
8 hours a day, a fair few are news sites with scrolling banners. One
refreshs every five minutes to download the latest scripts.
All it needs is for something like a Space Shuttle launch to be on and
watch this via Nasa TV, one hour at 300kbps is 135MB, or a new film
trailer at 25MB.
As for the zips these are compressed to save space already, i.e. text
files that compress from around 50MB to 10MB each time, these are
often received in email and I have to analyse them and forward results
with files elsewhere. So zipping them is bandwidth efficient...:-)
>Email is a very handy medium and computers are handy for automating things
>like sending emails when people go over quota.
So perhaps the website should tell potential customers this? Do you
prewarn at say 20MB before exceeding quota? Since its too late once
exceeded.
Imagine a household with 2 parents and 2 kids sharing a PC, with the
ADSL connection it would not take long for this to be exceeded.
Perhaps this isnt the customer you are targetting?
Andrew
Stephen Dean
Paul S. Owen
|
| "Paul S. Owen" <p.owen@ic> wrote in message
| news:972137918.7913.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
|
| > And Microsoft Windows Updates? MSDN? Numerous and various game demos?
| > Everything on Betanews? Winfiles? Cnet? Unless you've got terrabytes of
| > constantly updated mirrors online people will have to go outside your
| > network at some point.
| >
|
| Your looking at mirroring these yourself each then ?
? I'm asking what _you_ mirror and offer in an unlimited way (bandwidth
wise) to the end user. The sites I mention are not atypical for many users
and thus represent somewhat the sort of download traffic those users may
request. Unless you're mirroring all these sites (plus many many others)
those users _will_ have to go off your network to obtain them ... thus
incurring additions to their 'quota' allowance.
| > And again why are you limiting downloads? The only reason that makes any
| > sense is your network cannot handle the demand.
|
| The fibre can handle it.
So again, why are you limiting it if your network can cope with the load?
| SDSL uploads - when the time comes we will cross that one.
Well BT start SDSL trials in the new year AIUI ... better get ready to cross
that bridge quickly! And since SDSL is (at this stage at least) being
targetted directly at leased line customers I don't think they'll appreciate
upload limitations whatsoever.
Andrew
>> people are doing this, the traffic from this wouldnt count, as it
>> wouldnt have originated from me?
>>
>"and so not be attributed to your traffic."
This sort of negates the 500MB limit on the basic ADSL offerings,
since your small FTP has the potential to exceed your personal quota
per day...
So a few users running ftp/web servers for small sites would be able
to use more bandwidth without exceeding their bandwidth, i.e. a good
way of downloading an ISO image would be to get someone to upload to
the ftp server on the machine at the end of USB connection.
Yes I know you have a ftp batch server, but past use of these has
shown them to be a pain, ideal for when using a modem, but when my
connection is almost as fast as the FTP site I'm downloading from, it
becomes a barrier to smooth working.
Andrew
Stephen Dean
--
Regards
--
| Stephen Dean Fixed cost Internet access available @
| Senior Technical Consultant http://www.plus.net
| PlusNet Technologies LTD
+----------"PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet"----------
"Andrew" <ne...@farina.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:39f1ac49...@news.demon.co.uk...
> On Sat, 21 Oct 2000 15:25:14 +0100, "Stephen Dean" <sd...@plus.net>
> wrote:
>
> >What websites are you browsing to get 500MB worth of webpages per day ..
> >some ones with nice large graphics on no doubt. 100Mb in zips in the
email
> >per day .. clever way to send things when it UUencodes it and increases
the
> >size by 1/3rd - not very bandwidth efficient - and are you sending
> >"graphics" as you are a "webdesigner" in the zips or what else ??
>
> I dont have to disclose this, but web browsing can account for around
> 8 hours a day, a fair few are news sites with scrolling banners. One
> refreshs every five minutes to download the latest scripts.
>
Very minimal - a few kb per download at most.
> All it needs is for something like a Space Shuttle launch to be on and
> watch this via Nasa TV, one hour at 300kbps is 135MB, or a new film
> trailer at 25MB.
>
Space shuttle launch: One off and does not happen very often.
Film trailers - thats a lot of films.
> As for the zips these are compressed to save space already, i.e. text
> files that compress from around 50MB to 10MB each time, these are
> often received in email and I have to analyse them and forward results
> with files elsewhere. So zipping them is bandwidth efficient...:-)
>
Its been a long day .. :)
> >Email is a very handy medium and computers are handy for automating
things
> >like sending emails when people go over quota.
>
> So perhaps the website should tell potential customers this? Do you
> prewarn at say 20MB before exceeding quota? Since its too late once
> exceeded.
>
This is an Internet connection - not EWS (Early Warning System)
> Imagine a household with 2 parents and 2 kids sharing a PC, with the
> ADSL connection it would not take long for this to be exceeded.
> Perhaps this isnt the customer you are targetting?
>
Should have better control of your kids .... and yourself .. ;p
>
> Andrew
>
>
Andrew
wrote:
>"Paul S. Owen" <p.owen@ic> wrote in message
>news:972137918.7913.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
>> "Stephen Dean" <sd...@plus.net> wrote in message
>> news:3bhI5.2294$Ms3.120193@stones...
>> |
>> | Linux ISOs available on the Plusnet File Vault for download
>>
>> And Microsoft Windows Updates? MSDN? Numerous and various game demos?
>> Everything on Betanews? Winfiles? Cnet? Unless you've got terrabytes of
>> constantly updated mirrors online people will have to go outside your
>> network at some point.
>>
>
>Your looking at mirroring these yourself each then ?
I doubt it, but things like Windows Update with ADSL it's possible to
download service packs etc rather than wait the week or two for the CD
to appear.
Also Windows Update likes to download and install directly, so FTP
batch may not actually work for all files.
Andrew
Stephen Dean
weekend.
--
Regards
--
| Stephen Dean Fixed cost Internet access available @
| Senior Technical Consultant http://www.plus.net
| PlusNet Technologies LTD
+----------"PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet"----------
"Paul S. Owen" <p.owen@ic> wrote in message
news:972140263.8822.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
> "Stephen Dean" <sd...@plus.net> wrote in message
> news:zRhI5.2314$Ms3.121509@stones...
> |
> | "Paul S. Owen" <p.owen@ic> wrote in message
> | news:972137918.7913.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
> |
> | > And Microsoft Windows Updates? MSDN? Numerous and various game demos?
> | > Everything on Betanews? Winfiles? Cnet? Unless you've got terrabytes
of
> | > constantly updated mirrors online people will have to go outside your
> | > network at some point.
> | >
> |
> | Your looking at mirroring these yourself each then ?
>
Andrew
wrote:
>http://www.plus.net/info/more_info.html#bandwidth
>
>--
>
>Regards
>
>--
>| Stephen Dean Fixed cost Internet access available @
>| Senior Technical Consultant http://www.plus.net
>| PlusNet Technologies LTD
>+----------"PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet"----------
>
>"Andrew" <ne...@farina.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:39f1a8ef...@news.demon.co.uk...
>> On Sat, 21 Oct 2000 15:18:34 +0100, "Paul S. Owen" <p.owen@ic> wrote:
>>
>> >And again why are you limiting downloads? The only reason that makes any
>> >sense is your network cannot handle the demand. When SDSL becomes
>available
>> >are you going to limit uploads as well?
>>
>> From my reading they are including the upload in this aswell. But only
>> traffic with your IP Header on it?
>>
>> Andrew
Yes that's what I read...and it seems to indicate
UPLOAD+DOWNLOAD=500MB limit.
Pasting...
"i. Data Transfer Quota - this is described as the total amount of
data passing between your equipment, whether modem or router, and our
network, in any 24 hour period. The sum total is calculated both
upstream and downstream; the only exception to this being downstream
traffic taken from the File Vault service."
Andrew
Stephen Dean
--
Regards
--
| Stephen Dean Fixed cost Internet access available @
| Senior Technical Consultant http://www.plus.net
| PlusNet Technologies LTD
+----------"PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet"----------
"Stephen Dean" <sd...@plus.net> wrote in message
news:W7iI5.2323$Ms3.122075@stones...
>
>
> --
>
> Regards
>
> --
> | Stephen Dean Fixed cost Internet access available @
> | Senior Technical Consultant http://www.plus.net
> | PlusNet Technologies LTD
> +----------"PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet"----------
>
> "Andrew" <ne...@farina.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:39f1ac49...@news.demon.co.uk...
Andrew
wrote:
>> I dont have to disclose this, but web browsing can account for around
>> 8 hours a day, a fair few are news sites with scrolling banners. One
>> refreshs every five minutes to download the latest scripts.
>Very minimal - a few kb per download at most.
To be exact 25KB each time, a quick check of cache show's 50MB from
Fridays browsing and that was not a full day.
>> All it needs is for something like a Space Shuttle launch to be on and
>> watch this via Nasa TV, one hour at 300kbps is 135MB, or a new film
>> trailer at 25MB.
>Space shuttle launch: One off and does not happen very often.
>Film trailers - thats a lot of films.
No 25MB is one 480x320 Quicktime download, go have a look at
www.apple.com/quicktime trailers from there are better than VHS
quality and ADSL makes the playing of these feasible.
>> As for the zips these are compressed to save space already, i.e. text
>> files that compress from around 50MB to 10MB each time, these are
>> often received in email and I have to analyse them and forward results
>> with files elsewhere. So zipping them is bandwidth efficient...:-)
>Its been a long day .. :)
And I know of these, support can occur at anytime.
>> So perhaps the website should tell potential customers this? Do you
>> prewarn at say 20MB before exceeding quota? Since its too late once
>> exceeded.
>This is an Internet connection - not EWS (Early Warning System)
But I would expect to be warned if it was going to cost me money, and
especially as the T&C's suggest I could have connection terminated if
I regularly exceed the limit...
A suggestion would be to aggregate the bandwidth allocation over a
longer period a week or month, therefore special one off downloads
wouldnot cause problems.
>> Imagine a household with 2 parents and 2 kids sharing a PC, with the
>> ADSL connection it would not take long for this to be exceeded.
>> Perhaps this isnt the customer you are targetting?
>Should have better control of your kids .... and yourself .. ;p
This has been the beauty of ADSL, no worries on phone bill and ability
to communicate via video/audio with family abroad. Something that is
coming more and more common, now PC's are capable of creating video
clips.
Andrew
Paul S. Owen
NASA and ESA transmit live pictures now for typically every launch ... they
certainly do happen regularly.
| Film trailers - thats a lot of films.
I'd guess the average size of broadband quicktime trailer must be 25MB+
(since Demon don't limit downloads I've never had to bother about what size
they are ... so I admit this could be quite wrong). Have you looked at the
Quicktime trailer page? Dozens and dozens of trailers there ... I won't even
point you to the Quicktime TV site, nor Atom Films, nor ... ;)
| > So perhaps the website should tell potential customers this? Do you
| > prewarn at say 20MB before exceeding quota? Since its too late once
| > exceeded.
|
| This is an Internet connection - not EWS (Early Warning System)
So you're not warning users they are nearing their quota? Extremely poor
that. One of the _nicest_ things for me (and I suspect all trialists and of
course now live service users) about ADSL has been the fact that you do not
need to worry about the time you've been online. What you're doing is
reintroducing that worry by causing users to have to constantly check what
they're doing.
| > Imagine a household with 2 parents and 2 kids sharing a PC, with the
| > ADSL connection it would not take long for this to be exceeded.
| > Perhaps this isnt the customer you are targetting?
|
| Should have better control of your kids .... and yourself .. ;p
Next you'll be saying that you limit downloads for the good of the user, to
stop them from using their PC's too much.
Paul S. Owen
|
| The answers are there
The answer I want is to the question "why when you say your network is
capable of handling the load do you insist on download/upload limits"?
Paul S. Owen
| On Sat, 21 Oct 2000 15:18:34 +0100, "Paul S. Owen" <p.owen@ic> wrote:
|
| >And again why are you limiting downloads? The only reason that makes any
| >sense is your network cannot handle the demand. When SDSL becomes
available
| >are you going to limit uploads as well?
|
| From my reading they are including the upload in this aswell.
This just makes the situation even more bizarre ...
Paul Cummins
wrote:
>
>
> --
>
> Regards
>
> --
> | Stephen Dean Fixed cost Internet access available @
> | Senior Technical Consultant http://www.plus.net
> | PlusNet Technologies LTD
> +----------"PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet"----------
Hmmm, Works for an ISP, but top-signs, then posts everything (including
unsnipped text) UNDER the sig... hence under the Sig-Sep.
Please, gain clue, you may then gain customers...
Interest declared
--
Paul Cummins
Andrew McIntyre
<gse...@thefreeinternet.co.uk.NOSPAM> wrote:
>Christ, you're paying £45 a month and they put a bandwidth limit on !!! This
>is not at all funny. When did they impose this limit ? Was it clear when you
>signed with them ? Is your signiture on a peice of paper with this limit on
>? If not, stick it up their arse and sign with a decent ISP
>(A&A,Nildram,Iomart)
>
bang on G, the sooner more people find out about this crap "service"
the better
john
> Dear all,
>
> The bandwidth restrictions are in place to enable us to maintain a
balanced
> service to the majority and ensure that their ADSL service is protected
from
> those who would view the ADSL service as the same as having private
circuit
> connection. ADSL is not intended to be a permanantly used connection i.e.
to
> be used for downloading files 24hrs a day, its is not costed that way or
> built that way.
>
> ADSL is an "always-on" service and the semantics used to describe us as
> saying that it is "only a fast service" is just a play on words and has
been
> completely mis-reported. Those of you who know about ADSL will know that
is
> not a permanent connection - just "always-on" - since it uses a dial-up
> connection and can re-connect in a matter of micro-seconds - with the
TCP/IP
> control stack being able to account for the data loss during this
> disconnection time and the data be re-requested in time for transfers to
be
> continued without error - thereby giving the "effect" of being a permanent
> connection.
>
> We offer one of the most competetive ADSL packages on the market today
which
> together with the contented availability (50:1) our service also offers an
> included array of applications which cannot be found with other service
> providers elsewhere, and you should also note that the 500MB/day is only
for
> particular ADSL services and not the whole range, more information on
which
> can be found at
Do note that anyone who is sane would probably go to an ISP that doesn't
limit data transfer, and I would never recommend an ISP that does limit the
amount that you can use an always on permanent connection.
This is the sort of thing [daily transfer limits] that you would expect from
free ISPs, (i.e... If ADSL was free, I would maybe expect an ISP to say, you
can transfer 100MB/day, and this would be reasonable because they do have
costs to cover.) and not from any other ISP, (except maybe BT(openworld).
The only other ISP that I know that is doing this is Newnet, and anyone who
purchases ADSL from them would have to be mentally incapacitated because the
limit is 1GB/month!!!!!!!!!!! with a £20 additional charge for each
additional gigabit of data transfer.
john
--
--------------------------------------------------
John Hunt, jo...@adslguide.org.uk
www.ADSLguide.org.uk - UK ADSL News & Discussion
(this e-mail was in no way intended to insult anyone)
john
500MB/day data transfer. How many customers are you projecting to get?
john
--
--------------------------------------------------
John Hunt, jo...@adslguide.org.uk
www.ADSLguide.org.uk - UK ADSL News & Discussion
"Stephen Dean" <sd...@plus.net> wrote in message
news:s0gI5.2264$Ms3.117423@stones...
> Please read the first original paragraph very carefully again - the
> bandwidth limitations are there to ensure that everyone gets a fair share.
>
> --
>
> Regards
>
> --
> | Stephen Dean Fixed cost Internet access available @
> | Senior Technical Consultant http://www.plus.net
> | PlusNet Technologies LTD
> +----------"PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet"----------
>
> "Paul S. Owen" <p.owen@ic> wrote in message
> news:972131457.5354.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
> > "Stephen Dean" <sd...@plus.net> wrote in message
> > news:YEfI5.2255$Ms3.116749@stones...
> > |
> > | I was referring to the product which was in dispute at the time - the
> USB
> > | option. As I said there are other options and information available on
> > these
> > | at the links provided.
> >
> > But you're limiting downloads for _all_ services. Since your argument
for
> > doing this on the USB variant is that it's not intended to be an always
on
> > solution surely you apply the same argument for ethernet?
> >
> > | Our core network is capable - but we are balancing it for the
majority,
> >
> > It's capable but you need to balance it for the good of all? If it's
> capable
> > it's capable, you shouldn't need to start limiting bandwidth.
john
john
--
--------------------------------------------------
John Hunt, jo...@adslguideNOSPAM.org.uk
www.ADSLguide.org.uk - UK ADSL News & Discussion
"Stephen Dean" <sd...@plus.net> wrote in message
news:cciI5.2325$Ms3.122246@stones...
> Time to go - have a good weekend.
>
> --
>
> Regards
>
> --
> | Stephen Dean Fixed cost Internet access available @
> | Senior Technical Consultant http://www.plus.net
> | PlusNet Technologies LTD
> +----------"PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet"----------
>
> "Stephen Dean" <sd...@plus.net> wrote in message
> news:W7iI5.2323$Ms3.122075@stones...
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > --
> > | Stephen Dean Fixed cost Internet access available @
> > | Senior Technical Consultant http://www.plus.net
> > | PlusNet Technologies LTD
> > +----------"PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet"----------
> >
> > "Andrew" <ne...@farina.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:39f1ac49...@news.demon.co.uk...
> > > On Sat, 21 Oct 2000 15:25:14 +0100, "Stephen Dean" <sd...@plus.net>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >What websites are you browsing to get 500MB worth of webpages per day
> ..
> > > >some ones with nice large graphics on no doubt. 100Mb in zips in the
> > email
> > > >per day .. clever way to send things when it UUencodes it and
increases
> > the
> > > >size by 1/3rd - not very bandwidth efficient - and are you sending
> > > >"graphics" as you are a "webdesigner" in the zips or what else ??
> > >
> > > I dont have to disclose this, but web browsing can account for around
> > > 8 hours a day, a fair few are news sites with scrolling banners. One
> > > refreshs every five minutes to download the latest scripts.
> > >
> >
> > Very minimal - a few kb per download at most.
> >
> > > All it needs is for something like a Space Shuttle launch to be on and
> > > watch this via Nasa TV, one hour at 300kbps is 135MB, or a new film
> > > trailer at 25MB.
> > >
> >
> > Space shuttle launch: One off and does not happen very often.
> > Film trailers - thats a lot of films.
> >
> > > As for the zips these are compressed to save space already, i.e. text
> > > files that compress from around 50MB to 10MB each time, these are
> > > often received in email and I have to analyse them and forward results
> > > with files elsewhere. So zipping them is bandwidth efficient...:-)
> > >
> >
> > Its been a long day .. :)
> >
> > > >Email is a very handy medium and computers are handy for automating
> > things
> > > >like sending emails when people go over quota.
> > >
> > > So perhaps the website should tell potential customers this? Do you
> > > prewarn at say 20MB before exceeding quota? Since its too late once
> > > exceeded.
> > >
> >
> > This is an Internet connection - not EWS (Early Warning System)
> >
> > > Imagine a household with 2 parents and 2 kids sharing a PC, with the
> > > ADSL connection it would not take long for this to be exceeded.
> > > Perhaps this isnt the customer you are targetting?
> > >
> >
> > Should have better control of your kids .... and yourself .. ;p
> >
> > >
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Lala
-- lala --
Lala
people running your website are you - losing my vote - leave the lad alone -
only doing his job ... more than you are doing at the moment - there are
valid arguments for both sides .... at least i wont be able to get adsl for
a bit in my area but it will be interesting to watch you lot squabble ..
-- lala --
john
news:8sslfk$ogl$1...@neptunium.btinternet.com...
The views I express are my own personal views as opposed to 'ADSLguide's
views. We are actually conversing over the exact same issue, and views seem
to be mixed.
john
john
(Still waiting for a response from plusnet on the issue of the bandwidth
capacity of the BT fatpipe they have.)
--
--------------------------------------------------
John Hunt, jo...@adslguideNOSPAM.org.uk
www.ADSLguide.org.uk - UK ADSL News & Discussion
"Stephen Dean" <sd...@plus.net> wrote in message
news:YEfI5.2255$Ms3.116749@stones...
>
> I was referring to the product which was in dispute at the time - the USB
> option. As I said there are other options and information available on
these
> at the links provided.
>
> Our core network is capable - but we are balancing it for the majority, as
> stated. The test of time will tell.
>
> --
>
> Regards
>
> --
> | Stephen Dean Fixed cost Internet access available @
> | Senior Technical Consultant http://www.plus.net
> | PlusNet Technologies LTD
> +----------"PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet"----------
>
> "Paul S. Owen" <p.owen@ic> wrote in message
> news:972127494.3973.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
> > "Stephen Dean" <sd...@plus.net> wrote in message
> > news:gMeI5.2233$Ms3.114963@stones...
> > |
> > | completely mis-reported. Those of you who know about ADSL will know
that
> > is
> > | not a permanent connection - just "always-on" - since it uses a
dial-up
> > | connection and can re-connect in a matter of micro-seconds
> >
> > er Stephen I've had ADSL now for several months, can't say I've _ever_
had
> > to redial. I think you're confusing the USB variant with the ethernet
> > variant. ADSL is just the enabling technology and it _does_ allow for
> > _always on_ _permanently connected_, or whatever else you want to class
it
> > as, connections. The fact that BT are being cheap by offering a USB
setup
> > has absolutely nothing to do with this fact. If they or Alcatel so
desired
> > they could write the PPPoA and driver code into a pseudo-NIC driver and
> you
> > would never have to knowingly dial.
> >
> > All you are doing by limiting bandwidth is effectively admitting your
core
> > network is not capable of sustaining the loads you believe will be put
> upon
> > it. The solution is not to limit bandwidth but to invest in your
> > infrastructure as quickly as possible.
john
> On Sat, 21 Oct 2000 15:29:30 +0100, "Stephen Dean" <sd...@plus.net>
> wrote:
>
> >"Paul S. Owen" <p.owen@ic> wrote in message
> >> |
> >> | Linux ISOs available on the Plusnet File Vault for download
> >>
> >> Everything on Betanews? Winfiles? Cnet? Unless you've got terrabytes of
> >> constantly updated mirrors online people will have to go outside your
> >> network at some point.
> >>
> >
> >Your looking at mirroring these yourself each then ?
>
> download service packs etc rather than wait the week or two for the CD
> to appear.
>
> Also Windows Update likes to download and install directly, so FTP
> batch may not actually work for all files.
There is one 'security update' on there that I havent downloaded because
last time it meant I had to reinstall windows. (Win98SE)
john
john
> get a life please
>
> -- lala --
I like the From e-mail address you quote.
G
news:972150444.986.0....@news.demon.co.uk...
> So the network is only capable if each ADSL connection does not exceed
> 500MB/day data transfer. How many customers are you projecting to get?
>
> john
>
>
>
Four and a blind goat.
Isn't timing as crucial as transfer ? If the four people and blind goat all
use there 500m at once, won't the zx-80 at plusnet burn out ? What if the
blind goat let's his kids look at a trailer for barney ? Hopefully PlusNet
will inform social services for us.
I can't get over the nerve of what the PlusNet guy is posting. Maybe they
should change their name to third reich internet (slogan - we have ways of
restricting your talk).
G.
Lala
restrictions like that would definitiely not make me happy in the same
situation, but there must be something behind their policy on this ... hmmm
... oh well .. by the time i get adsl it will be old hat ... good luck with
the website ..
-- lala --
john
To download a full-live album from napster may be approximatly 100MB (The
last I downloaded was Finger Eleven Live @ The Brewery, which totalled
100MB).
That took maybe 30- 60mins.
Application tryout's?
- Adobe photoshop 5.5 tryout is 74.1 MB
If you average 60KB/s on the USB you could get it in maybe 28mins.
That is 2.3 hours to downloaded 500MB of whatever it may be.
john
--
--------------------------------------------------
John Hunt, jo...@adslguideNOSPAM.org.uk
www.ADSLguide.org.uk - UK ADSL News & Discussion
"Stephen Dean" <sd...@plus.net> wrote in message
news:qBgI5.2274$Ms3.118806@stones...
> What are you going to be downloading that would need you to be downloading
> at full bandwidth of 512kbps for 24/7 ?
>
> --
>
> Regards
>
> --
> | Stephen Dean Fixed cost Internet access available @
> | Senior Technical Consultant http://www.plus.net
> | PlusNet Technologies LTD
> +----------"PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet"----------
>
> "Paul S. Owen" <p.owen@ic> wrote in message
> news:972132978.5952.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
> > "Stephen Dean" <sd...@plus.net> wrote in message
> > news:s0gI5.2264$Ms3.117423@stones...
> > |
> > | Please read the first original paragraph very carefully again - the
> > | bandwidth limitations are there to ensure that everyone gets a fair
> share.
> >
> > But your network is quote "capable", why do you have to limit downloads
to
> > allow everyone a fair share? If the network is capable of handling the
> loads
> > (as it should be through provision of core bandwidth and effective
traffic
> > shaping if required) there should be no reason to limit access.
Graham Murray
> ADSL is an "always-on" service and the semantics used to describe us as
> saying that it is "only a fast service" is just a play on words and has been
> completely mis-reported. Those of you who know about ADSL will know that is
> not a permanent connection - just "always-on" - since it uses a dial-up
> connection
Since when? ADSL is a permanent connection between the equipment in
your premises and the DSLAM in the BT exchange (or wherever). It is
*not* a dial-up connection.
Adrian Kennard
> The only other ISP that I know that is doing this is Newnet, and anyone who
> purchases ADSL from them would have to be mentally incapacitated because the
> limit is 1GB/month!!!!!!!!!!! with a £20 additional charge for each
> additional gigabit of data transfer.
TELE2 have usage limits.
I think when they started it was 300MB a month or some such and
them 50p/MB !!
MY DNS traffic alone would have exceeded that !
They are a bit better these days, but many of there services
do still have usage limits.
--
_ Andrews & Arnold Ltd, 0118 376 0000 http://aa.nu/
(_) _| _ . _ _ Professional Voice and Data Systems for Business.
( )(_|( |(_|| ) Gold Certified Alchemists, ADSL service providers
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ We have been busy --- http://www.FireBrick.co.uk/
Paul Cummins
wrote:
> get a life please
Get some accountability, anonymous coward
Paul Cummins
(DVDyke) wrote:
> So assuming there is 31 days in a month it would be 15500MB per month
> (Which should be plenty enough for anybody).
I moved that in my first 5 DAYS on ADSL...
Carl
"DVDyke" <ze...@heehaw.com> wrote in message
news:hos3vs0kfgo11l836...@4ax.com...
> With this kind od attitude I'd steer WELL clear of the service if I
> was looking for an ADSL provider..
Well. Where to start?
I think the guy was onto a looser from the start, its obvious that no-one is
prepared to find out exactly how the system would be implemented.. For
example, if it was worked out on a monthly basis (which it may be - i will
hopefully find out on monday - more on this later), then even on the basic
package (£45 per month), this is 15gb of downloads per month - i used a 512k
connection myself and average around 4/10 gb per month, i couldnt
contemplate downloading 15gb... Maybe some users would need to download more
for legitimate use, in which case, would it not be more prudent to get a
higher speed connection which (barring slow websites/bottlenecks) should
allow you to download quicker and would give a higher quota?
I am not condoning restrictions in downloads, on the other hand, i am not
condemning them. My service with telewest has been severly hit by problems
this week, if they were to tell me that this could be helped by quota's, i
probably wouldnt be amused but i would settle (as long as the ammounts were
reasonable).
Monday;
I have recieved an email from Plusnet saying that one of their directors
will be in touch with me on monday, hopefully i will be able to get a bit of
info which i will post here and on the site i work on
( www.adslguide.org.uk ).
Finally, Stephen was simply explaining his policy here and i found he was
being very honest and obviously knew what he was talking about, this is
something to encourage. Certain responses have been downright rude, i would
expect people to be polite, he was (IMO). People in other groups are almost
screaming out for companies to post into their forums but never get this,
this newsgroup is in a good position to get info and influence broadband
communications in the uk - dont waste that chance.
Thanks,
Carl.
--
Carl Johnson
ca...@adslguide.org.uk
www.adslguide.org.uk
Rowland Baker
PlusNet are either very brave or very stupid.
Being the only ISP to impose restrictions on download volume makes the
PlusNet packages even more uncompetitive on a like for like package basis
when comparing against several other ISPs already competing in the same
space.
Here is a list of ISPs that offer similar packages (based on 500K,USB) that
are around the price range of PlusNet and do not have a daily quota.
Prices quoted include VAT
ISP (Installation/monthly)
-BT Openworld (150/39.99)
-Madasafish (180/39.99)
-Freeserve (150/39.99)
-iomart (179.78/45.83)
-Claranet (176.25/49.99)
-IFB (150/50)
-Timewarp (150/50)
-Vispa (176.25/52.88)
-Nildram (176.25/58.75)
-Andrews & Arnold (217.38/58.75)
Plusnet comes in @ (176.25/52.88) BTW
Visit http://www.broadband-help.com/cm_reviews.asp for more information.
--
-------------------------------------------------
Rowland Baker, Editor & Site Creator
e-mail: rowlan...@NOSPAMbroadband-help.com
(remove NOSPAM to reply)
URL: http://www.broadband-help.com
-------------------------------------------------
"Andrew McIntyre" <and...@smackdesign.co.uk> wrote in message
news:t4l3vs0bl2lcit0tr...@4ax.com...
Paul S. Owen
news:egnI5.751$9d.1...@news3.cableinet.net...
|
| I think the guy was onto a looser from the start,
Indeed, but certainly admire him attempting to stand up for the case. Most
employees in similar positions would throw their arms in the air and blame
'da management' for these sorts of things.
| its obvious that no-one is
| prepared to find out exactly how the system would be implemented..
Andrew asked, the responses he got can be found here.
| For example, if it was worked out on a monthly basis (which it may be
The limits are given per day, if in fact it turns out these are calculated
monthly then this is significantly better (while also indicating extremely
poor information on the site). Although again I would ask, why limit
bandwidth?
| contemplate downloading 15gb... Maybe some users would need to download
more
| for legitimate use, in which case, would it not be more prudent to get a
| higher speed connection which
er, it's up to the individual but I'd recommend shifting to a supplier that
doesn't impose download/upload limits at all.
| this week, if they were to tell me that this could be helped by quota's, i
| probably wouldnt be amused but i would settle (as long as the ammounts
were
| reasonable).
When an ISP starts imposing quotas you've got to ask whether they've got
plans (and money) in place to carry out what would appear to be fast needed
upgrades.
| Finally, Stephen was simply explaining his policy here and i found he was
| being very honest
See my first comment.
| something to encourage. Certain responses have been downright rude,
I certainly see no point in attacking Stephen directly, or indeed attacking
PlusNet per se. They are a company and as such are entitled to deploy their
services in whatever way they see fit. I think however they should look at
remarks here very closely. Imposition of quotas is obviously unpopular and
as it appears the 'daily' quota method seems highly questionable.
Anyone posting to this forum should expect feedback, positive and negative
... that includes companies. Indeed companies should see this as a good
first tier impression of proposed services, they are after all talking
directly to potential users.
Nospam
<carljohn...@MEbigfoot.com> wrote:
>I am not condoning restrictions in downloads, on the other hand, i am not
>condemning them.
Well, it would appear from his posts that a similar situation to
Freeserve Unlimited could/is developing with ADSL.
FSU was taken to be 24/7 unlimited access and usage. Freeserve then
started talk of usage being too heavy or abused by some and started
booting folk off FSU citing some catch all sections in the T&Cs.
Is ADSL to go the same route ? I assumed it was to be a permanent
connection to be used as much or as little as one wanted. Now at
least one ISP is appearing to cite similar catch all abuse sections in
the T & Cs to restrict the service.
Either there is enough bandwidth or there isn't. This should be
stated "up front" when the contract is made, otherwise people signing
up to a believed unrestricted ADSL service, find out later about the
restrictions but are locked in to a 12 month contract. In the US, I
am sure class action lawsuits would be under consideration :-))
Bernard Peek
<ze...@heehaw.com> writes
>On Sat, 21 Oct 2000 15:51:10 +0100, "Stephen Dean" <sd...@plus.net>
>wrote:
>
>>The answers are there - time for home. Make your own decisions. Have a good
>>weekend.
>>
>>--
>>
>>Regards
>
>With this kind od attitude I'd steer WELL clear of the service if I
>was looking for an ADSL provider.
Personally, it makes me more likely to consider Plusnet as a provider. I
would rather deal with a company that tells me what the limits are than
go through the Freeserve Unlimited or Red Hot Ant scenarios.
The bandwidth limits tell me that Plusnet have thought about the
problems in advance, and have solutions in place from day one. I don't
want to use a service that is likely to disappear one day because they
screwed up their planning.
>Just my personal views.
Likewise.
--
Bernard Peek
b...@shrdlu.com
b...@shrdlu.co.uk
Kris
achieves absolutely nothing, and even then- why on cant those who feel so
inclined make use of the quieter night-time hours? I currently use
BTopenworld and love the freedom it grants me, I often que huge amounts of
movie clips and game demos in getright and leave it run while I'm asleep or
working ... to lose that would be to lose the only reason I really want
ADSL ... I dont browse the web 8 hours a day, and I dont send hundreds of
megs of emails, but I DO use lots of bandwidth for reasons which are
irrelevant ... its like I remember someone saying, many users were kicked
off their "freetime" isp for thinking the unlimited option actually meant
unlimited ...
I signed up for adsl for 12 months with confidence that it was a broadband,
unlimited connection ... YES it may be aimed at the home user who browses
the web and sends a few emails, but there were NO warnings that it was for
this market *only* ... ... if ISPs want x thousand people who just browse
the web and send emails, and will fine (yes FINE- the extra charge doesnt
magically increase the servers capacity, atleast in the short term) users
who want to do more than that, then it plainly shows they want a
low-maintenance customer base only - maximising income while minimising
server overheads ... the heavier users do not disrupt service, peak hours
will be peak hours, theres no two ways about it ... their servers MUST be
able to handle that to a reasonable degree ... and if it can handle that,
then there's absolutely no reason why they cant handle traffic in non-peak
hours ... so whats the problem? the only one I can think of is that users
who are on 24/7 take up an ip, and therefore too many people who are "always
on" will cause problems, and the 500mb limit will change user's habbits to
only be on when absolutely necessary, thus cheaply eliminating the ip issue
-Kris
"G" <gse...@thefreeinternet.co.uk.NOSPAM> wrote in message
news:39f1dde6$1...@news.bizonline.net...
Kris
if the limit was that high there wouldnt be any point in a limit)
-Kris
"Paul Cummins" <tram...@lineone.net> wrote in message
news:memo.20001021...@tramlink.aquaphiles.eu.org...
Paul Cummins
(Kris) wrote:
> I second that, if it was 15gigs a week I'd still be complaining
> (admidedly
> if the limit was that high there wouldnt be any point in a limit)
In fact, time to scare people. I'm currently setting up my internal
network security, using PC Anywhere and lots of different tools to get to
all 95 machines on 8 IP addresses...
Today, according to my logs on the router, I have moved 2GB of TCP packets
since 11am. So, in 16 hours, I've done 4 times PlusNet's 24 hour limit.
Wonder what will happen when I start 'Working from Home?'
Thank DEITY$ I pay a reasonable supplier for my service.
--
Paul Cummins
Andrew
wrote:
<big snip>
>able to handle that to a reasonable degree ... and if it can handle that,
>then there's absolutely no reason why they cant handle traffic in non-peak
>hours ... so whats the problem? the only one I can think of is that users
>who are on 24/7 take up an ip, and therefore too many people who are "always
>on" will cause problems, and the 500mb limit will change user's habbits to
>only be on when absolutely necessary, thus cheaply eliminating the ip issue
>
>-Kris
The issue of occupying an IP only applies to dial up modems not to
ADSL, especially the ethernet service. With the ethernet service the
IP address is only released if you power down the router. Also with
the USB modem since the BTIgnite service will support all users being
on at once, relying on some users not having their kit connected is
the wrong way to manage IP address's with ADSL.
I did some sums, working on that at end of each BTCentral product
(i.e. pipe connecting users to the ISP ) the router will support 1600
users at the same time, the pipe size is 34Mbps (larger ones are
planned but not installed yet). This is where the main contention
comes from (NOTE: The number of users on each fat pipe is upto the
ISP, i.e. they can overcontend or under contend.
Since
1) 1600 users 512Kbps would require 819Mbps for 1:1 contention
2) With the fat pipe 1600 users at 512Kbps consume 34Mbps, to give the
correct 20:1 contention ratio this fat pipe will support 1360 users.
3) Assumme the ISP has 1360 dial up customers connected at 50kbps (
reasonable with a 56K modem ) they are uncontended once dialed in and
would consume 68Mbps.
So 1360 connected ADSL customers are actually using less bandwidth
than 1360 dial up customers that are connected!!!
Makes the sums interesting for whether you would prefer to have ADSL
or dialup customers.
Andrew
Nospam
Cummins) wrote:
>Wonder what will happen when I start 'Working from Home?'
Industrial sabotage from your co-residents (if you have any) :-))))
95 machines in a semi ???
john
Paul S. Owen
news:498kV3AZ...@shrdlu.com...
|
| The bandwidth limits tell me that Plusnet have thought about the
| problems in advance,
It tells me they're unlikely to have enough core or external bandwidth.
| and have solutions in place from day one.
Download and upload quotas are not solutions, they're fudges. Solutions
would be ensuring enough bandwidth is in place and that expansion plans are
in hand to ensure no quotas are necessary from the outset.
john
that,
> >then there's absolutely no reason why they cant handle traffic in
non-peak
> >hours ... so whats the problem? the only one I can think of is that
users
> >who are on 24/7 take up an ip, and therefore too many people who are
"always
> >on" will cause problems, and the 500mb limit will change user's habbits
to
> >only be on when absolutely necessary, thus cheaply eliminating the ip
issue
> >
> >-Kris
>
> ADSL, especially the ethernet service. With the ethernet service the
> IP address is only released if you power down the router. Also with
> the USB modem since the BTIgnite service will support all users being
> on at once, relying on some users not having their kit connected is
> the wrong way to manage IP address's with ADSL.
>
> I did some sums, working on that at end of each BTCentral product
> (i.e. pipe connecting users to the ISP ) the router will support 1600
> users at the same time, the pipe size is 34Mbps (larger ones are
> planned but not installed yet). This is where the main contention
> comes from (NOTE: The number of users on each fat pipe is upto the
> ISP, i.e. they can overcontend or under contend.
>
> Since
>
> 1) 1600 users 512Kbps would require 819Mbps for 1:1 contention
>
> 2) With the fat pipe 1600 users at 512Kbps consume 34Mbps, to give the
> correct 20:1 contention ratio this fat pipe will support 1360 users.
>
> 3) Assumme the ISP has 1360 dial up customers connected at 50kbps (
> reasonable with a 56K modem ) they are uncontended once dialed in and
> would consume 68Mbps.
>
> So 1360 connected ADSL customers are actually using less bandwidth
> than 1360 dial up customers that are connected!!!
>
> Makes the sums interesting for whether you would prefer to have ADSL
> or dialup customers.
That is assuming max capacity for both. No ISP would assume that for
anything because their overhead costs would be HUGE, and they would go bust
very quickly.
You could probably setup an ISP using the 2Mbit ADSL service (although
against T&C IIRC). You could have 36 dialin users on it- assuming they use
max capacity constantly. In all reality you could probably quadrouple that
number and have 144 dialin things. Not everyone dial's in at once. Not
everyone loads a webpage at the same time. The traffic across your
connection would probably be fairly constant, and you'd need to experiment
until you found the right formula for number of users / bandwidth ratio.
Remember X-Stream? That was total crap service, but it was free. It improved
as they changed the amount of bandwidth available to each user, ie reduced
the user- bandwidth ratio. (Don't like saying contention ratio.) BTInternet
turned crap when the 0800 number came out. BTInternet turned crapper when
their 0800 number went evenings. I expect they invested in more bandwidth
and therefore changed the user-bandwidth ratio making it better. It's still
crap at times- so I hear.
ADSL ISPs have a fixed BTcentral fat pipe. Whether it is constantly used to
full capacity is unlikely. However, they are limited by the number of users
they can put across it by the BT router at the ISP end. It supports 1600
users from the small -> 34Mbps pipes, and the 155Mbps pipe that is supposed
to be around / coming out, should support 16,000 (i think thats right
(unless the sin changed, or i am forgetful)). The amount of bandwidth
assigned to a 34Mbps at the ISP end is probably varied according to their
calculations of what the usage is like. If they have large numbers of users,
then it would vary
I have forgotten why I am writing this now.
Oh yeah.. dialup is likely to be as contended for bandwidth as ADSL.. It is
likely in the same proportion, but I don't know.
Andrew
<jo...@adslguideNOSPAM.org.uk> wrote:
>I have forgotten why I am writing this now.
>Oh yeah.. dialup is likely to be as contended for bandwidth as ADSL.. It is
>likely in the same proportion, but I don't know.
Dialup is probably even more contended than ADSL, there's the fight to
get an intial connection as well:-)
My numbers were showing the maximum potential bandwidth useage for
ADSL and dialup customers is not that different, the ADSL pipe is
likely to have a higher average bandwidth though. Since it would only
take 68 users to fill a 34Mbps pipe.
Back to PlusNet apparently their backend service is provided by
BTColossus network...not heard of that one before...is this the same
network that people like BTInternet use?
Andrew
john
They are just saying that their backbone is provided by BT(.net) ie..
http://www.bt.net/network.htm They refer to it as project 'Colossus'.
They have 310x2 + 155 across the ocean. Don't know how accurate/old this is
though.
john
john
news:2f54vscngmu7ehump...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 21 Oct 2000 22:56:45 +0100, "Rowland Baker"
> <rowlan...@NOSPAMbroadband-help.com> wrote:
>
> >Hi,
> >PlusNet are either very brave or very stupid.
>
that
> >are around the price range of PlusNet and do not have a daily quota.
>
>
> >-Madasafish (180/39.99)
>
> >-iomart (179.78/45.83)
>
> Funny that , I thought Madasafish and iomart were , effectively, the
> same company ?
Effectively the same, but they offer different content to the different
markets that they are aimed.
Iomart - Businesses
Madasafish - Home users
Jings! - Scottish ISP for both dialup and ADSL. Don't think its released
yet. (Check press releaseat www.iomart.com for more info.)
john
news:MboI5.1192$Om6....@news11-gui.server.ntli.net...
> Hi,
>
> PlusNet are either very brave or very stupid.
>
> PlusNet packages even more uncompetitive on a like for like package basis
> when comparing against several other ISPs already competing in the same
> space.
You are forgetting newnet
T&C type thing on their site says:
"I authorise NewNet Limited to charge my creditcard monthly for the above
ADSL
service until further notice. BT's minimum contract period is 1 year. I
understand
should my bandwidth exceed 1GB/month. I will pay an additional Ł20/GB
I will pay NewNet directly for my BT line set up costs Ł150 or Ł260
I agree to NewNet's terms at http://www.newnet.co.uk/terms/
All prices exclude VAT."
PlusNet Customer Support
news:d054vsk6s6qan61v5...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 21 Oct 2000 20:46:02 GMT, "Carl"
> <carljohn...@MEbigfoot.com> wrote:
-snip-
> Is ADSL to go the same route ? I assumed it was to be a permanent
> connection to be used as much or as little as one wanted.
This is the idea of ADSL.
> Now at
> least one ISP is appearing to cite similar catch all abuse sections in
> the T & Cs to restrict the service.
We aren't really restricting it, if you read Steve's (Dean) posting fully,
it is all explained.
We are merely protecting other users of our system.
> Either there is enough bandwidth or there isn't. This should be
> stated "up front" when the contract is made,
This is made very clear in the T&Cs when you sign up.
> otherwise people signing
> up to a believed unrestricted ADSL service, find out later about the
> restrictions but are locked in to a 12 month contract. In the US, I
> am sure class action lawsuits would be under consideration :-))
Kind Regards.
Duncan
--
| Duncan Scotland Fixed cost Internet access available @
| Customer Services http://www.plus.net
PlusNet Customer Support
Paul S. Owen <p.owen@ic> wrote in message
> | problems in advance,
>
We have plenty. Take a look.
http://www.plus.net/content.html?action=network
Paul Cummins
wrote:
>
> Industrial sabotage from your co-residents (if you have any) :-))))
Tempted to wire the block for Ethernet...
> 95 machines in a semi ???
95 machines in a Studio! Buying the semi after 12 months of ADSL.
--
Paul Cummins
Andrew McIntyre
<sup...@plus.net> wrote:
>
>Paul S. Owen <p.owen@ic> wrote in message
>news:972213215.14141.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
>> "Bernard Peek" <ber...@shrdlu.com> wrote in message
>> news:498kV3AZ...@shrdlu.com...
>> |
>> | The bandwidth limits tell me that Plusnet have thought about the
>> | problems in advance,
>>
>> It tells me they're unlikely to have enough core or external bandwidth.
>
>We have plenty. Take a look.
>http://www.plus.net/content.html?action=network
>
so if you have plenty why are you restricting the true meaning of
broadband always on etc..
no wonder this country lags behind net technology when jerks like
this company are messing it up
john
news:DUCI5.3890$Ms3.158619@stones...
>
> Paul S. Owen <p.owen@ic> wrote in message
> news:972213215.14141.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
> > "Bernard Peek" <ber...@shrdlu.com> wrote in message
> > news:498kV3AZ...@shrdlu.com...
> > |
> > | problems in advance,
> >
>
> We have plenty. Take a look.
> http://www.plus.net/content.html?action=network
That page providers no physical evidence that you have a large amount
bandwidth at your disposal. It just says "we have a large backbone network."
How about some real evidence rather than the crap that you paid someone to
write there?
Paul S. Owen
| http://www.plus.net/content.html?action=network
I can think of only two reasons to impose quotas, one is to greedily extract
extra cash from customers the other is to limit impact on a core network
that will not be able to cope with demand (and/or no network upgrade
plans/money are in place to grow the system with demand). If it's not the
former (and I'll assume PlusNet is a half decent company that wouldn't do
this) it's really got to be the later.
Isn't Colussus the 'new' national BT 2.4Gb/s (or there abouts) network? The
network over which _all_ ADSL (live service) and Surftime data flows before
being shunted to the ISPs own networks? Or am I confusing this with
something else?
Paul S. Owen
|
| We aren't really restricting it,
No, you're simply charging people who use to much of it. Worse still, if
what Stephen said is true you are not even giving people plenty of warning
that they're about to exceed that quota.
| We are merely protecting other users of our system.
If your core network has enough bandwidth then there is no need to 'protect
other users'. I'm not having a go at you or PlusNet Duncan but frankly this
"We're doing it to protect you" line is really beginning to annoy me.
Paul S. Owen
|
| They are just saying that their backbone is provided by BT(.net) ie..
| http://www.bt.net/network.htm They refer to it as project 'Colossus'.
Isn't this the network which shunts ALL ADSL and Surftime data off to the
ISPs?
john
> "PlusNet Customer Support" <sup...@plus.net> wrote in message
> news:7RCI5.3888$Ms3.158383@stones...
> |
> | We aren't really restricting it,
>
> No, you're simply charging people who use to much of it. Worse still, if
> what Stephen said is true you are not even giving people plenty of warning
> that they're about to exceed that quota.
Why stop themselves from making more money?!
It would get them browny points, but they would lose money. Not that they
are going to be getting a great amount anyway.
john
> |
> | They are just saying that their backbone is provided by BT(.net) ie..
> | http://www.bt.net/network.htm They refer to it as project 'Colossus'.
>
> Isn't this the network which shunts ALL ADSL and Surftime data off to the
> ISPs?
I've not heard of it with regard to that, but the PDF on their site does
imply it by viewing it as a substitute to the public telephone network for
carrying internet traffic.
You may well be right.
Nospam
Cummins) wrote:
>
>>
>> Industrial sabotage from your co-residents (if you have any) :-))))
>
>Tempted to wire the block for Ethernet...
>
>> 95 machines in a semi ???
>
>95 machines in a Studio! Buying the semi after 12 months of ADSL.
Hell you won't need central heating in the winter but lots of cooling
in the summer....and as for the noise !!!! :-))))))
Nospam
<sup...@plus.net> wrote:-
>We aren't really restricting it, if you read Steve's (Dean) posting fully,
>it is all explained.
You are restricting by additional cost a service that many believed
was to be subject only to a flat fee monthly payment and which is
supplied as such by the almost all of the other providers.
As for a 500gb daily limit.... this would be exceeded simply by the
online puchase and downloading of the equivalent of a music cd - a
sales mode being looked at and developed by the music industry and
indeed the software industry.
"Protecting ones users" reminds me of the reason the Department of
Transport refused to release the data from vehicle model tests, "it
wasn't in the publuc interest" to know which had potentially fatal
design faults. i.e. it has nothing at all to do with what it purports
to.
urban junkie
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
I guess what it boils down to is that Plusnet have a right to lay down
whatever terms and conditions they want about usage of ADSL, as long as it
is made sufficiently clear to people signing up.
If they want to, they can justify it as protecting the interests of all
users of the service. If the real reason is that they don't have enough
bandwidth, then I guess they are protecting other users.
However, it's my right to decide that I don't want any part of this metered
ADSL tariff, and that I don't believe their justifications. It's also my
right to advise anyone I know not to touch the Plusnet service with a
bargepole.
The answers are there, and I have made my decision. Hopefully I will make or
influence many other people's decisions as well.
I've had a great weekend.
Zane Wilson
>
>http://www.plus.net/content.html?action=network
Without getting too far into this argument (as it seems that while the UK
telecoms industry remains in its infancy we can't really expect the
breadth and depth of service enjoyed by countries such as the USA and
Singapore), you may want to update that web page. I quote:
"An additional benefit is of course that payment for access to this
network will be charged at fixed rates, so that you will no longer have to
worry about how long or how many times you connect to the Internet."
You should really add a footnote to the phrase "... at fixed rates" to say
"at a fixed fee for 500MB/day and Łx per megabyte thereafter".
Also, expand the last sentence to say "you will no longer have to worry
about how long or how many times you connect to the Internet, just about
how much data you download!"
Regards,
Zane.
Lauren Child
"Paul S. Owen" wrote:
> Download and upload quotas are not solutions, they're fudges. Solutions
> would be ensuring enough bandwidth is in place and that expansion plans are
> in hand to ensure no quotas are necessary from the outset.
>
What this says to me is that they havent implemented any form of load
control so one user could max out the shared segment. Maybe they should
look at some form of queuing on the routers. In cisco speak "custom
queuing" would seem to be the answer, so youll just throttle back
connections and send packets on a round robin basis. default WFQ will
weight the connection in favour of the high bandwidth user at the
expense of the others.
Whilst I agree quotas are a fudge, there's never enough bandwidth - the
nature of web traffic means that unless you get up to speeds where you
are running faster than the human ability to read, people just click
faster the faster pages load.
TTFN
Lauren
--
lau...@laurenchild.net Lauren Child, BSc. CCNP-ATM & CCDP Certified
http://www.laurenchild.net/ http://www.routerfaq.net/
Lauren Child
Graham Murray wrote:
> Since when? ADSL is a permanent connection between the equipment in
> your premises and the DSLAM in the BT exchange (or wherever). It is
> *not* a dial-up connection.
Same goes with a telephone. Always on to the exchange. What he meant
was you have to created (e.g. dial) the tunnel between your equipment
and the remote equipment. As has been mentioned previously on this
group - the current service isnt an ADSL service at all, its a
IPoPPP/telephony service that just happens to use ADSL as an
intermediate transmission medium - the NTE is the USB box/router, not
the ADSL line.
Andrew
<lau...@laurenchild.net> wrote:
>
>
>Graham Murray wrote:
>> Since when? ADSL is a permanent connection between the equipment in
>> your premises and the DSLAM in the BT exchange (or wherever). It is
>> *not* a dial-up connection.
>
>Same goes with a telephone. Always on to the exchange. What he meant
>was you have to created (e.g. dial) the tunnel between your equipment
>and the remote equipment. As has been mentioned previously on this
>group - the current service isnt an ADSL service at all, its a
>IPoPPP/telephony service that just happens to use ADSL as an
>intermediate transmission medium - the NTE is the USB box/router, not
>the ADSL line.
The ethernet service can be considered permanent, since the router
will reconnet automatically if connection drops and it remembers your
authentication details.
Andrew
Paul S. Owen
news:39F2FFE3...@laurenchild.net...
|
| What this says to me is that they havent implemented any form of load
| control so one user could max out the shared segment.
Indeed (I think I did start discussing something ala traffic shaping) and/or
a lack of core/external bandwidth.
| Whilst I agree quotas are a fudge, there's never enough bandwidth - the
| nature of web traffic means that unless you get up to speeds where you
| are running faster than the human ability to read, people just click
| faster the faster pages load.
With ADSL as currently implemented I don't entirely agree with this
statement. For a set number of users the upper bound on bandwidth is fixed
as the central link to the ISP (not by the sum of the max download+upload
speeds of each subscriber). All companies should have an idea of expected
growth of their userbase and thus should be able to predict the required
speed of growth to meet that demand.
Any company implementing quotas starts alarm bells ringing in my head
suggesting they either don't have any growth plans, don't have the finances
to see those plans through or even both. I get the impression that many ISPs
are 'doing ADSL' because unless they do they may find themselves left behind
(both technically and economically). But I wonder just how long some ISPs
have been planning for broadband ...
Paul S. Owen
|
| Same goes with a telephone. Always on to the exchange. What he meant
| was you have to created (e.g. dial) the tunnel between your equipment
| and the remote equipment.
The ethernet service has no such qualms and is also subject to quotas @
PlusNet and thus the arguments are surely the same ... I did raise this but
it was glossed over.
Graham Murray
> I can think of only two reasons to impose quotas, one is to greedily extract
> extra cash from customers the other is to limit impact on a core network
> that will not be able to cope with demand
This should not be needed with a TCP/IP network as the protocols have
provision for handling network congestion and 'learning' the available
(usable) bandwidth for each connection. So quotas should not be needed
as the network itself will regulate the throughput for each
connection. This would be even more efficient if more equipment was to
implement ECN (RFC 2481.)
Paul Cummins
wrote:
> Hell you won't need central heating in the winter but lots of cooling
> in the summer....and as for the noise !!!! :-))))))
My electric bill is £41 a month with an Electric Cooker, my Gas is £15 a
YEAR! and I have Gas water heating...!
Cooling is easy... most of the machines are 486 or less, running Linux, so
I just open the windows. I don't notice the noise, since most of them have
'run down' on the hard drives and fans.
--
Paul Cummins
Terrance Richard Boyes
> Time to go - have a good weekend.
Add to the bandwidth wastage, top-quoting fuckwits who follow up
their own posts without snipping anything, or adding anything
of use.
[snip 2K]
--
Remember you don't have to vote for _all_ candidates, socks out.
Darren Aitcheson
<sup...@plus.net> wrote:
>Nospam <nospam> wrote in message
>news:d054vsk6s6qan61v5...@4ax.com...
>> Either there is enough bandwidth or there isn't. This should be
>> stated "up front" when the contract is made,
>
>This is made very clear in the T&Cs when you sign up.
It wasn't in my case. You added the bandwidth restriction to your
website and T&Cs _AFTER_ I had signed up, which I see as a severe
breach of contract on your part.
I'm waiting to see how long it takes you to process my cancellation.
Remember, the longer it takes you guys, the more likely I am to have a
chat with my solicitor, and the more interest you will have to pay me
as you rather bizarrely only allow monthly payment by credit card (not
debit card).
Regards,
Darren Aitcheson,
The disgruntled customer in Jane Wakefield's report
Kris
transparent with CD quality audio ...
a 62 minute CD (just picking a number out of thin air, would be 50-68mins in
nearly all cases) encoded at 192kbps is still about 90mb ... and if thats
12 songs, you're talking about 7.27mb per song -- in practise tracks can be
from 4mb to 16mb (depending on length) assuming you want real CD quality, so
500mb = 200+ songs isnt very fair ... I'd say 70-140
-Kris
"Paul Matthews" <pa...@hepcats.co.uk> wrote in message
news:fqu8vs882ggfr31n3...@4ax.com...
> Nospam wrote:
>
> >As for a 500gb daily limit.... this would be exceeded simply by the
> >online puchase and downloading of the equivalent of a music cd
> If you were daft enough to do it in wav format. The MP3s I have seem to be
a
> little over 2M on averate, so you are looking at 200+ songs. More like a
large
> box set!
> --
> Paul Matthews
> pa...@hepcats.co.uk
> http://www.hepcats.co.uk
john
He was however referring to what Nospam said, as in "500gb daily limit"
john
--
--------------------------------------------------
John Hunt, jo...@adslguideNOSPAM.org.uk
www.ADSLguide.org.uk - UK ADSL News & Discussion
"Kris" <k.b...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:8t178p$1s1$1...@neptunium.btinternet.com...
Alex W
> We offer one of the most competetive ADSL packages on the market today
which
> together with the contented availability (50:1) our service also offers an
> included array of applications which cannot be found with other service
> providers elsewhere, and you should also note that the 500MB/day is only
for
> particular ADSL services and not the whole range, more information on
which
> can be found at
If it's so competitive why do you have to restrict your users activities?
A&A will happily let me Download 5.4GB (Max theoretical limit) per day on my
USB ADSL connection, so why do you only let your customers download a mere
fraction of what they theoretically can download? I'm sure you'll find that
most users will naturally download less than 500MB per day when aggregated
over a whole month, it just seems ridiculous to tell people when they can
download and when they can't; surely this goes against the entire ethos of
the internet.
BTW. I feel I should make it know that I'm a disgruntled F9 Customer.
Regards,
Alex W
Alex W
> 10:1 contention ratio - not bad
Do you actually know what contention is? See my ISPs site (Andrews &
Arnold - www.aa.nu) for details.
> We can monitor it quite easily thank you.
That's extremely Orwellian of you. Isn't there such a thing as privacy?
Regards,
Alex W
nigel wood
lo again Lauren
Nigel
--
| Nigel Wood Smart Applications - Tools for life
| Honorary Human
| Insight ASP LTD
http://www.myopenapps.com
+-----------------------Open Source Innovation--------------------------
funky...@netscapeonline.co.uk
wrote:
Yer right. But IP still doesn't do any of the above (see RFC791). Many
of the L2 protocols do though. So if more IP networks were engineered
more efficiently at L2, then maybe TE methods would have some chance
of working.
M.
Mark Evans
> Either there is enough bandwidth or there isn't. This should be
> up to a believed unrestricted ADSL service, find out later about the
> restrictions but are locked in to a 12 month contract. In the US, I
> am sure class action lawsuits would be under consideration :-))
Except that class action lawsuits tend to help the defendant more
than the plaintiffs in some cases...
Mark Evans
> "PlusNet Customer Support" <sup...@plus.net> wrote in message
> news:7RCI5.3888$Ms3.158383@stones...
> |
> | We aren't really restricting it,
> No, you're simply charging people who use to much of it. Worse still, if
> what Stephen said is true you are not even giving people plenty of warning
> that they're about to exceed that quota.
Let alone the possibility that it opens up denial of service issues.
Mark Evans
> On Sun, 22 Oct 2000 14:22:58 +0100, "PlusNet Customer Support"
> <sup...@plus.net> wrote:
>>Nospam <nospam> wrote in message
>>news:d054vsk6s6qan61v5...@4ax.com...
>>> Either there is enough bandwidth or there isn't. This should be
>>> stated "up front" when the contract is made,
>>
>>This is made very clear in the T&Cs when you sign up.
> It wasn't in my case. You added the bandwidth restriction to your
> website and T&Cs _AFTER_ I had signed up, which I see as a severe
> breach of contract on your part.
That by itself isn't a breach of contract. The breach comes if they
attempt to apply the new terms to people with old contracts.
Martin Saunders
DVDyke wrote:
>
> On Sat, 21 Oct 2000 15:51:10 +0100, "Stephen Dean" <sd...@plus.net>
> wrote:
>
> >The answers are there - time for home. Make your own decisions. Have a good
> >weekend.
> >
> >--
> >
> >Regards
>
> With this kind od attitude I'd steer WELL clear of the service if I
> was looking for an ADSL provider. I am sorry but if you are
> representing PlusNet and have this attitude, your customer service
> needs a major overhaul. If you are management then you need to get
> together with the other managerial and IT staff and rethink your
> policies before you lose (Or at least not gain) customer base. I hope
> your fiscal year looks brighter than what your attitude represents
> here.
>
> Just my personal views.
I personally think you should lay off the guy. He has some very valid
points to make and has been polite at all times.
It looks to me like someone fairly high up is trying to cover their back
in regards to IP costs. This view rather shows inexperience in the bulk
IP market (something which Satellite and large leased lines gave us a
few years ago), as although you do have the odd abuser, they are quite
predictable, and can easily be costed in.
Regards
Martin
--
+-----------------
Martin Saunders New Products Manager Easynet Ltd.
'Best ISP product - Easynet Dial' by ISPA 2000 http://about.easynet.net
martin....@uk.easynet.net Tel:(+44) (0)20 7900 4444
-----------------+