PTP on Comcast?
Greg Moore
I fear I already know the answer and I don't like it.
Any recommendations for $55/mo (or less) internet that can give me the same sort of bandwidth (or better) and allow me to share with the 'hood?
--
Greg Moore
gr...@maxathome.com
Russell Senior
Greg> So, I've been thinking lately it's high time that I setup a PTP
Greg> node here at my home for all my neighbors to tap into and get
Greg> access. Is it still a no-no to do this if you're using Comcast
Greg> for Internet service?
Yes, as far as I know.
Greg> I fear I already know the answer and I don't like it.
Yeah, officially, I don't like it either.
Greg> Any recommendations for $55/mo (or less) internet that can give
Greg> me the same sort of bandwidth (or better) and allow me to share
Greg> with the 'hood?
It depends on where you are located. I live about 1000 feet from a
telco switch and get 7 Mbps down on my DSL. When I had both Comcast
and DSL a few years ago, my DSL was actually faster. But, that is
going to be location dependant.
This is why I'm such a big advocate of a public fiber-to-the-premises
network in Portland. I want very high-speed infrastructure in an
environment where you can shop for ISPs to get the Terms of Services
you like. FTTP along those lines obviously isn't an answer today, but
it could be tomorrow, if we all make it known it is what we want.
--
Russell Senior, Secretary
rus...@personaltelco.net
Don Park
<rus...@personaltelco.net> wrote:
> Greg> So, I've been thinking lately it's high time that I setup a PTP
> Greg> node here at my home for all my neighbors to tap into and get
> Greg> access. Is it still a no-no to do this if you're using Comcast
> Greg> for Internet service?
>
> Yes, as far as I know.
from http://www.comcast.net/terms/subscriber/
"You agree that the Services and the Comcast Equipment will be used
only by you and the members of your immediate household living with
you at the same address and only for personal, residential,
non-commercial purposes, unless otherwise specifically authorized by
us in writing. You will not use the Comcast Equipment at any time at
an address other than the Premises without our prior written
authorization. You agree and represent that you will not resell or
permit another to resell the Services in whole or in part."
and http://www.comcast.net/terms/use/
"resell the Service or otherwise make available to anyone outside the
Premises the ability to use the Service (for example, though wi-fi or
other methods of networking), in whole or in part, directly or
indirectly. The Service is for personal and non-commercial residential
use only and you agree not to use the Service for operation as an
Internet service provider or for any business enterprise or purpose
(whether or not for profit)"
I have heard that business-class comcast service has different rules.
Don
Tyler van Houwelingen
FCC just ruled that Comcast cant block bittorent traffic on their
cable/fiber network. All wireless providers block some traffic - seems like
there is a double standard. I believe this will come to a head with mobile
WiMAX being used to replace DSL, cable, etc.
Interesting article:
http://www.fiercebroadbandwireless.com/story/t-considers-wimax-copper-replac
ement-u-s/2008-08-03
Ido Rosen
that would let them vote with their wallets.
On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 11:55 AM, Ido Rosen <iro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> AT&T is not a monopoly GSM/EDGE provider, and AT&T puts the VoIP
> restriction in users' contracts. Whether or not phone service
> provider contracts are legal or not is a wholly different matter.
> (Multi-year contractual network lock-in and exclusive hardware
> contracts are definitely questionable.) Comcast, however, is in many
> places a regional monopoly for cable internet access and cable
> television, and many users do not have a choice for broadband internet
> access. This puts more restrictions on Comcast. At least, I think
> that is the logic behind it: Users don't have any
>
Ido Rosen
restriction in users' contracts. Whether or not phone service
provider contracts are legal or not is a wholly different matter.
(Multi-year contractual network lock-in and exclusive hardware
contracts are definitely questionable.) Comcast, however, is in many
places a regional monopoly for cable internet access and cable
television, and many users do not have a choice for broadband internet
access. This puts more restrictions on Comcast. At least, I think
that is the logic behind it: Users don't have any
Yes, AT&T is a regional "landline" phone service monopoly, but we're
not talking about DSL here, just EDGE. Ultimately, I think what most
users want, whether they know it or not, is a stronger stance from the
FCC restricting all ISPs (not just Comcast) from blocking/throttling
by ANY content-based mechanism, in other words: throttle the whole
pipe or none of it at all.
Tyler van Houwelingen
Ty
Gary
competition in that space? I ask because King County has always allowed
more than one cable TV operator and Broadstripe is the current
contender. Is this allowed at the state or municipal level? If you ask
me, it's more a matter of economies of scale than monopoly. Just because
competition is allowed, does a 3rd party have enough capital to do so?
Webster defines "monopoly" as "exclusive ownership through legal
privilege, command of supply, or concerted action."
Re the iPhone, you're more than welcome to buy a device from Apple at a
higher price with no term obligation. However, afaik the 3G models may
be jailbroken but are not yet carrier unlockable.
-Gary
Michael Weinberg
>
> Not that I'm a fan of Comcast but I wonder if Multnomah County allows
> competition in that space? I ask because King County has always allowed
> more than one cable TV operator and Broadstripe is the current
> contender. Is this allowed at the state or municipal level? If you ask
> me, it's more a matter of economies of scale than monopoly. Just because
> competition is allowed, does a 3rd party have enough capital to do so?
> Webster defines "monopoly" as "exclusive ownership through legal
> privilege, command of supply, or concerted action."
It's a bit of each. The legal privilege is that even though they use
the public right of way, they are allowed to not serve as a common
carrier, which is what the phone companies and railroads (the model
for most telecom) are required to do. Indeed, a second company could
build a competing system, but that is very expensive, and generally
discouraged in favor of common carrier rules, since it keeps the right
of way from getting cluttered.
--
Michael Weinberg
President
Personal Telco Project, Inc.
A 501(c)(3) Non-Profit
Michael Weinberg
Also, the City of Portland (which governs the franchise agreement)
attempted to force common carrier on the previous cable company in the
late 90's. It went to the Supreme Court, I believe, and the City lost.
The FCC has also, as I understand it, maintained that cable is not a
communications service, even though they now provide tons of data and
voice service in addition to television.
Russell Senior
Gary> Not that I'm a fan of Comcast but I wonder if Multnomah County
Gary> allows competition in that space? I ask because King County has
Gary> always allowed more than one cable TV operator and Broadstripe
Gary> is the current contender. Is this allowed at the state or
Gary> municipal level? [...]
Michael> It's a bit of each. The legal privilege is that even though
Michael> they use the public right of way, they are allowed to not
Michael> serve as a common carrier, which is what the phone companies
Michael> and railroads (the model for most telecom) are required to
Michael> do. Indeed, a second company could build a competing system,
Michael> but that is very expensive, and generally discouraged in
Michael> favor of common carrier rules, since it keeps the right of
Michael> way from getting cluttered.
I think I recall that Qwest was recently granted authorization to
underbuild Comcast. Qwest seems to have no intention of actually
doing it, though.
Brian Beattie
The MT. Hood Cable Regulatory Commission which covers Fairview, Gresham,
Portland, Troutdale and Wood Village and Multnomah County. Has tried a
number of times to get a competitor to first AT&T and then Comcast. I
know specificly when the Portland suite was winding down one of the
requirements was open access to internet services, but that was just
before the dot-com bust and when it went bust all the bidders lost
interest.
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting a bad thing?
Brian Beattie LFS12947 | "Honor isn't about making the right choices.
bea...@beattie-home.net | It's about dealing with the consequences."
www.beattie-home.net | -- Midori Koto
Tyler van Houwelingen
I use the iphone on WiFi at least 80% of the time anyway, even for calls now (outbound voip I still have two numbers). It is about 5-10X faster and more reliable usually then EDGE. EDGE is only really worthwhile when I am roaming.
Some friends of mine have a couple of the Gen 1 ones from the USA running on the EDGE networks in Spain. Jailbroken of course.
Ty
-----Original Message-----
From: ptp-g...@googlegroups.com [mailto:ptp-g...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Gary
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 5:02 PM
To: ptp-g...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [ptp-general] Re: PTP on Comcast?