Change to AUP - Section (d)

Open discussion regarding technological or telecommunication issues
Locked
David R
Posts: 197
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 1:39 am
Location: Sydney

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by David R » Sat Nov 21, 2009 2:49 pm

I did recommend, more practically, these users be allocated (6hrs) nightly duration times (2am-8am period, more than sufficient allowance) for the ADSL 2 user group uncharged..

you do not see DSL 1 user group using, saturating, infiltrating, the prescribed 'co-operative' with abnormally high usage volumes like 100GB.

Transfer the DSL 2, the >80gb clients onto appropriate 1$/gb plan structure from January 1, 2010 ($45-$50 their base cost with a telephone line, wish I could get it ), should they not read faithfully your intention from next month,
->AUP then out the door. 8)
*Vista Ultimate* Billion,7402GL &TP-Link,D-W8920G <Atten(dB)42 @1.9 km>; HTC Kaiser II, WM6; Pre-paid RP2000 (Optus)
200GB@3.1Mbps,$60pm Zone 1+ 2X H-Line Budget; WP Saver VoIP._ 220.233.165.22x; $3,450 revenue: 5 years club.

Tazz
Posts: 177
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:05 pm
Location: Launceston

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by Tazz » Sat Nov 21, 2009 3:08 pm

I agree that heavy users be shaped, but not just the top 100 downloaders but any user over the stated monthly maximum limit of 79.5gig

bonson
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:51 pm
Location: Tasmania

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by bonson » Sat Nov 21, 2009 3:12 pm

You mentioned that 26.5gb was the average use off peak, simply set the limit to 35gb off peak and be done with it. That way you don't have these heavy users on your network and you're happy. If you're then concerned about wasting bandwidth, then great - increase the off peak allowances, to the point which the excess bandwidth is soaked up - and everyone gets to download what they want. You're "light" customers aren't being effected by these who are using the "excess" because they didn't want to download that much in the first place. You're happy because you're utilizing the full bandwidth that Exetel is paying for - based off your peak period.

It just seems as though you've got a problem with people using a heap of bandwidth in offpeak (not the ridiculous situation of the 500gb downloading, but rather considering those who use the full 60gb offpeak) and classing them as bad customers to have. You say that you don't want heavy downloaders - yet you have some of the highest limits in the industry - you say you want everyone to have an equal opportunity to download in offpeak - yet people do, the only thing stopping those who are not utilizing their full plan is no interest in it.
Thanks, Peleus. You've put into words what I've been trying to figure out how to say (and much more clearly than I ever would be able to). I look forward to hearing FA's reply.

Satyrfk
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 10:23 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by Satyrfk » Sat Nov 21, 2009 3:32 pm

bonson wrote:
You mentioned that 26.5gb was the average use off peak, simply set the limit to 35gb off peak and be done with it. That way you don't have these heavy users on your network and you're happy. If you're then concerned about wasting bandwidth, then great - increase the off peak allowances, to the point which the excess bandwidth is soaked up - and everyone gets to download what they want. You're "light" customers aren't being effected by these who are using the "excess" because they didn't want to download that much in the first place. You're happy because you're utilizing the full bandwidth that Exetel is paying for - based off your peak period.

It just seems as though you've got a problem with people using a heap of bandwidth in offpeak (not the ridiculous situation of the 500gb downloading, but rather considering those who use the full 60gb offpeak) and classing them as bad customers to have. You say that you don't want heavy downloaders - yet you have some of the highest limits in the industry - you say you want everyone to have an equal opportunity to download in offpeak - yet people do, the only thing stopping those who are not utilizing their full plan is no interest in it.
Thanks, Peleus. You've put into words what I've been trying to figure out how to say (and much more clearly than I ever would be able to). I look forward to hearing FA's reply.
his leaving on a jet plane, dont know when he'll be back again.

Good posts above, Im curious, what happens if every customer starts utilising their full 60gb offpeak allowance. Im sure it wont be long until most of the userbase gets up there. With the way everything is heading VERY fast; Games on demand (Steam/EA Download type services) Legitimate online file stream (Netflix, Zune etc) plus all these flashy websites that keep going up, I think alot of ISPs arent evolving as fast as is needed (Not entirely their fault, with the state of broadband monopolies in AUS) Thinking that users do not need alot of bandwidth legally (oh linux distros and movie trailers was it???) But these days its quite easy to chew through download limits totally legally with Streaming HD content etc. Sadly its being pushed on the entire world (most of which can keep up, but we cant) by the usa and asia, Where family members in the USA get 50mbs cable internet + cable tv + phone ENTIRELY UNLIMITED for $95usd a month, i mean WTF! And they get speed upgrades for FREE as their isps speed increases over time (they started on 18mbs or something)

I think ISPs are just going to have to get used to the heavy users. HEAVY. NOT. ABSURD (200-500gb) <-- how they downloaded that i dont know lol but i guess thats what some people will do when its offered as uncharged

alinos
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 3:28 am
Location: vic

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by alinos » Sat Nov 21, 2009 3:44 pm

Tazz the top 100 this month was only a trial to see what would happen when they were shaped and to experiment with said shaping

if you read the FA post youll see the idea was to shape anyone who gets within 10GB of 3x the monthly average
although from my expierience last night it was a lot lower than 64KB

enforcing the monthly max this month as has been pointed out so far is a little unfair since i was over it before it came into effect

ive only downloaded about a gig per night since then as these things were things i need or needed this week

i have no problem if i was shaped again tonight provided that it was actually a workable 64Kb connection since i couldnt even access the exetel page of any sort(woulda also been nice to know that i was in the top 100 but hey its cool) and no i havent downloaded 200GB

satyrfk

yeah but the USA isps dont have to pay for the data going down the deepsea cables like the aus isps do
the first month was always gonna be absurd anyway its the same as when you get paid you get 4000 a month you ration it out to things like food bills and you use nrly all of it up and some will got into savings ,each month theres sumthing else you want but you cant get cause you cant afford it on your 4000 dollar budget, then 12 months later someone pops up goes buy whateva you want this month, you probably go back and pick up all those things that you missed out on ontop of the things you still need this month, as time goes on the amount of money youd spend each month wouldnt be as bad

of course this analogy only work if things above 10000dollars cant be bought(there aint really files that a residential consumer would be downloading equivilant to a car

dbwalsh
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 12:27 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by dbwalsh » Sat Nov 21, 2009 4:37 pm

What gets me everytime is why we are both restricted for speed AND data limits. I know its mostly telstra's fault, but you'd think once your restricted by the data you can download, then speed only gets you there faster or slower at no real cost.

Tazz
Posts: 177
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:05 pm
Location: Launceston

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by Tazz » Sat Nov 21, 2009 4:49 pm

alinos wrote:Tazz the top 100 this month was only a trial to see what would happen when they were shaped and to experiment with said shaping
Yes I know.
I'm just saying that from Dec 1st users should be able to download up to the monthly limit (79.5gig or whatever), and then are shaped in the offpeak hours for the rest of the month. But VOIP should be exempt from shaping.

User avatar
jokiin
Volunteer Site Admin
Posts: 2970
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 10:23 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by jokiin » Sat Nov 21, 2009 4:51 pm

alinos wrote: i have no problem if i was shaped again tonight provided that it was actually a workable 64Kb connection since i couldnt even access the exetel page of any sort
I think a part of the problem is that when we all had 56k dialup the web was much lighter weight than it is these days, as the speed has increased the things we use the net for have become a lot more data intense also

alinos
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 3:28 am
Location: vic

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by alinos » Sat Nov 21, 2009 6:20 pm

yeah tazz that would be preferable :P

but im pretty sure staying under 80gb is simple enough

jokiin

64kpbs should mean 6.4KB/s download speeds last night since the web wouldnt work i tried downloading a file i had just to check speeds and it was normally sub 1KB/s

David R
Posts: 197
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 1:39 am
Location: Sydney

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by David R » Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:03 pm

Until you invest in the sort of router/server that can shape more than a few thousand users geographically dispersed as they are, effectively, and concurrently, irrespective of cached traffic and include nothing which could adversely harm the network out of restraining these clients, this is likely a dead end.

A cost benefit analysis would need apply and I and many others not particularly keen to provide this service for the 10% of users of whatever capability is required by those who should know better.

And I've been shaped a couple of times when it did function (semi-)correctly to prevent against (what I deem) unreasonably network charges - except for whatever reason it was not delivered at 8 KB and was inadequate to browse.

Now if we want to look at users traveling at 16 KB/s which is 57 MB/h, a delivered 128 Kbps, your 10 gb buffer (between 70-80 g b, 80-90 gb etc) is going to last 173 hours - which is a solid week &* more than TWO weeks of off peak time. Bandwidth management by stealth..( :roll: )
Last edited by David R on Sun Nov 22, 2009 12:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
*Vista Ultimate* Billion,7402GL &TP-Link,D-W8920G <Atten(dB)42 @1.9 km>; HTC Kaiser II, WM6; Pre-paid RP2000 (Optus)
200GB@3.1Mbps,$60pm Zone 1+ 2X H-Line Budget; WP Saver VoIP._ 220.233.165.22x; $3,450 revenue: 5 years club.

adamdmills
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:38 am
Location: Australia

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by adamdmills » Sun Nov 22, 2009 12:03 am

I'm still mystified as to the negative attitudes many people seem to harbour towards those who want to get as much bang for their buck as possible. Exetel offer a plan that gives you 90gb/month - by what logic shouldn't we be entitled to utilise 100% of that? Then they say "actually, for 12 hours a day you can download as much as you want", and act surprised that customers took advantage of this.

User avatar
CoreyPlover
Volunteer Site Admin
Posts: 5922
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 2:24 pm
Location: Melbourne, VIC

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by CoreyPlover » Sun Nov 22, 2009 12:32 am

adamdmills wrote:Then they say "actually, for 12 hours a day you can download as much as you want"
Show me where Exetel say this?

Exetel have an "uncharged" off-peak, not an "unlimited" off peak. The distinction is subtle, but deliberate, for exactly this reason. You are entitled to free off-peak downloads, so long as you do not abuse that privilege.

adamdmills
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:38 am
Location: Australia

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by adamdmills » Sun Nov 22, 2009 1:21 am

The distinction is a little bit too subtle, if you ask me. Uncharged, unmetered, unlimited: it's all a delicate game of semantics. Essentially, though, they made the announcement that the previously-aplied hard limit of 60gb was being removed, before turning around three weeks later and imposing another hard limit. Which, really, is fine. I'm happy to stick to any limit, knowing that I'm getting better value for money than from any other ISP in this country. But I'm still put off by the implication that the customers who would take full advantage of an offer like this (not having been informed, when the changes were first announced, that there would be a limit (whether hard or soft) to how much they could download in a month) are 'abusing' the system, and are customers that Exetel would rather not have. If Exetel didn't want people to shoot right past the old 60gb limit, they shouldn't have removed it in the first place.

rseydler
Posts: 129
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:45 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by rseydler » Sun Nov 22, 2009 10:53 am

Tazz wrote:
alinos wrote:Tazz the top 100 this month was only a trial to see what would happen when they were shaped and to experiment with said shaping
Yes I know.
I'm just saying that from Dec 1st users should be able to download up to the monthly limit (79.5gig or whatever), and then are shaped in the offpeak hours for the rest of the month. But VOIP should be exempt from shaping.
X2 and remove the block pages please? Just send an email when you hit 100% and shape the service. Block pages - well I'd never heard of them until I joined Exetel. Automatic shaping was much easier if the service seemed slow you check your usage meter or email.

Ron

alinos
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 3:28 am
Location: vic

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by alinos » Sun Nov 22, 2009 12:18 pm

why remove the block page

it only gonna cause an issue if you have a bunch od scheduled downloads and one of them trys to start after the block page comes up

based on the speeds recieved the other night sending an email is gonna be no use unless you have a phone that can check email or another internet source

the block pages also allow people an simple way to not go over htere limit

Locked