Back To The Future?

Discussions regarding new & existing plans and other Exetel initiatives
Dazzled
Volunteer Site Admin
Posts: 6003
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2006 1:16 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Back To The Future?

Post by Dazzled » Thu Oct 15, 2009 1:12 pm

I would have thought that anyone who could configure P2P would have no problem scheduling downloads - it is a basic computer skill.

ozblogger
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu May 14, 2009 2:37 pm
Location: Melbourne , AU

Re: Back To The Future?

Post by ozblogger » Thu Oct 15, 2009 2:03 pm

Dazzled wrote:I would have thought that anyone who could configure P2P would have no problem scheduling downloads - it is a basic computer skill.
I was referring to the "Families" that wouldn't use P2P , and form the target audience for this new Plan , according to Admin
So in another manner of speaking ... would they really care about Unlimited Off-peak downloads ?

ForumAdmin
Posts: 3663
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 2:31 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Back To The Future?

Post by ForumAdmin » Thu Oct 15, 2009 4:11 pm

rseydler wrote:How about exetel keep the current plans/timings with an small unlimited block at say 3am - 5am. That would convince the heavy users to schedule downloads to begin at 3am to save their precious allowances?
That's a really interesting idea.

nihonjin
Posts: 184
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2005 11:59 am
Location: Brisbane

Re: Back To The Future?

Post by nihonjin » Thu Oct 15, 2009 5:00 pm

as has been mentioned you could just modify the new no frills plans as follows:

1) go back to the 12 hour off peak - this is a great selling feature to other potential customers.

2) have a small window of time that is least utilised as unlimited ie 3am-5am or longer if possible - this will compete well with other plans that have unlimited and draw the heavy downloaders away from the midnight bottleneck .

3) keep the already generous peak and off peak downloads which already look better then all other providers out there.

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

Re: Back To The Future?

Post by David R » Thu Oct 15, 2009 8:45 pm

Hmm I won't comment the less than original feedback in this thread, this is a delicate process and if the subject had been setting $n, buyer suggestion would hardly have been sought. Let's keep minds open and fresh.

Might be good to get some female responses for a change, is there such a perspective? (or are they at theshops/exchanging txts??). ...Interest thus far has been less than overwhelming, these past 80 hours as the same personalities drift in and out of threads, threads receive <1000 clicks which just goes to show the forum generally is not read (apart from a few seldom enthusiasts). Then on with it.
The whole cancelling if you even look at P2P or NNTP could be a little hard for some people to swallow.
Banned P2P/NNTP(?) heh.. First rule of net neutrality #Treat All Protocols Equally (no discrimination), large and small. It would generate all sorts of, for the most part, bad attention excising such transmission and then your unlimited would be "make believe."

In my reference earlier to 'pools' for heavy usages, I would expect nothing less than Steve place the top 5% or whatever users in to such so they are removed from 'clear bandwidth;' as our network is already 83% utlilised across a 24 hour period this leaves us little spare room - and is as perfect as you might realistically aim for, before congestion becomes a negative.


Disclaimer: My views and my thoughts - merely a consumer, IP(/Exetel) service.
*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.

ForumAdmin
Posts: 3663
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 2:31 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Back To The Future?

Post by ForumAdmin » Fri Oct 16, 2009 10:49 am

I like the unlimited use in the 3 am to N am period for a more general user.

However I can't see any of the suggestions helping formulate a plan(s) that have a longer unlimited period.

Net neutrality? it isn't a question of protocol but a question of bandwidth utilisation that differentiates a P2P user from an HTTP user. In any event it's the provider's call what they allow and don't allow - end users aren't exactly limited in the choice of providers in Australia.

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

Re: Back To The Future?

Post by rseydler » Fri Oct 16, 2009 2:03 pm

Realisticly this is one killer marketting ploy from AAPT. I wouldn't switch for it and I'm certainly not loyal when it comes to services I pay for. If I can save my family money and get the service we require than I'm into it.

Enough about me though...

How about unlimited downloads on weekends? Instead of 7 x 12hour blocks it could be 2 x 24 hour blocks. These could be QoS'd (like the current midnight to 8am is) so that non P2P traffic is prioritised. Business traffic would be minorly affected thus saving the big spenders from complaining?

Couple this with the hidden HTTP proxy and you're clawing back some revenue.

Anything else but "all you can eat" wouldn't be a competing headline. Obviously without knowing some stats and pricing from Exetels side, it's hard to put suggestions forward.

Keep up the good work.

Ron

soaper
Posts: 494
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 2:19 pm

Re: Back To The Future?

Post by soaper » Fri Oct 16, 2009 4:25 pm

David R wrote: Might be good to get some female responses for a change, is there such a perspective? (or are they at theshops/exchanging txts??).
well i am probably not the typical female user
older rather than younger
dont use or even know how to download whatever everyone is downloading so busily.
and with a few exceptions........dont know what i am missing or care

my adult son who resides on the same computer system...........ditto.
we have hugely consuming hobbies that rely on the internet to exist......him more than me .
he has some need for download of stuff for assignments but it is not a lot.
but neither of us is the least bit interested in anything other than ABC iview .
i dont think either of us even uses the DVD to record.
if i want something to amuse me i go to the library adn get a video......for free.
tho i would be a customer for a reasonably priced video downloading service.

so there is one adult male and one adult female who barely count in the stats but hate to see slow speeds in the hours between 6.30 am to 1 am LOL.

i cant contribute anything of value here except that i wonder how many hours the average downloader does download if they do it intelligently.
is it 2 or 4 or 6, 12 ??
if it could be made to work within a small time frame with the use of schedulers (or whatever they are) then the hours from 2 am to say 6-7am for all that heavy stuffs would sound ok to me and maybe trial a new service and see how it pans out with people coming out of the woodwork for whatever is offered. i might even download something too :-).
i am a minority but maybe i wont be with the new plans
dunno

exetel know the usage patterns and their customers downloads so would be the ones to comment.
i tend to ramble

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

Re: Back To The Future?

Post by David R » Sat Oct 17, 2009 7:35 am

Thanks soaper, let's say I'm aware your household+descendant's stated status from years trekking this, and one other (sub)forum, to the point I see the same personalities deift in and out of threads-my point again, but you still add valued perspective so 'thanks'.....reminds me it has been months since I was banished from a particular "broadband forum" over something ridiculous and probably political, by an overkeen gestapo - all before I could collect my 'irritating scum' title - as many an Exetel affiliate becomes rated after a time writing there. So back to our topic.

I'll admit taking some license from the thread title 'Back To The Future' -- now how else should FA's writing be interpreted other than from a historical perspective, hence my interpretation this has to translate to a pooled set of users - or at least a best effort/creative way to offer the Illusion of unlimited without banning things or dicing and splicing hours to fit a subset or the majority of users. Reading in-between, Exetel aims to incentivate its clients (even the big spenders, eventually), to switch to a pay-50c-as-you -go style of simplicity and abolish excess charges. Now on to pooling.

I myself can't remember being placed inside of any off-peak pool. ever. but I was very aware this is how some at the time bandwidth was being rationed; and from time to time connections would be released from that pool accordingly (yellow, orange, red--48, 60, 72 GB's-etc).. but graduating from a Diploma I don't recognise or in this instance know, if having multiple POPs with the newly distributed network effects the possibility of a pool being reinstated(?) Is pooling no longer a benefit?

We are limited indeed if we can no longer rely on this historic method: segregative pooling. '3 am to N' (is that shorthand for Noon?) unlimited, whilst easier to deliver will produce an outcome which favours High Speed users.
Understand a 1.5Mbit connection is restricted already, to 300 GB pm - so if based on a 2 hour section of the day at an irregular hour then the ADSL1 connections may only reach to a dozen/two dozen gigabytes as 'their unlimited,' while an ADSL2 may chomp up to 12 GB in a single scheduled period. This is why I think 12 hours makes the better policy. Better than 8, 9 or 10 hours - because its so very very important to accommodate ADSL1(+2) in the mix.

rseydler, your idea "unlimited downloads on weekends? Instead of 7 x 12hour blocks it could be 2 x 24 hour blocks." - while not the most ideal scenario is still more flexible than '2 hours' for which a 1.5Mbit connection could download maybe a gigabyte. So that plan could have some merit or it could lead to entire weekends of throttling.

Disclaimer: My views and my thoughts - merely a consumer, IP(/Exetel) service.
*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.

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

Re: Back To The Future?

Post by David R » Sat Oct 17, 2009 8:20 am

I'm interested to learn in more detail about --
"Exetel has been examining how we can provide IP bandwidth at much lower costs than we do today and have received some interesting offers from different providers"
-- if someone may shed light on this situation.

From the information I've gained, or at least my understanding of it, bandwidth is being dynamically provided i.e. it will rise and fall automatically to meet the level demanded- unless management should do something to override it.

If up to 6 Gbit (ingress+egress) is required we have to FUND this amount, but in fairness it tends to fluctuate around 5 Gbit level i.e. 5 Gbit +/-1 Gbit per 24 hour period.

So if 5 Gbit(on average) of 6 Gbit(max) were utilised in practice the network could then be said to be 5/6 or 83%-utilised.

If Exetel has sourced a supplier(s) (a diamond in the rough?) willing to accommodate 4-to-6 Gbit--i.e. average of 5 Gbit--Exetel's aggregate of utilised capacity, then I suppose we have won something like a 17% discount i.e. we would be charged at 5 Gbit +/- 1 G per arrangement, rather than on the conventional 6 Gbit 'peak'. This can be justified competitively eg. exetel is a small and very disciplined buyer and claims a negligible amount of bandwidth compared to Telstra or whomever.

Disclaimer: My views and my thoughts - merely a consumer, IP(/Exetel) service.
*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.

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

Re: Back To The Future?

Post by David R » Sat Oct 17, 2009 8:41 am

And lastly, I do have a preferred solution but I'm just not sure how workable.

In short, you split the usages in to 20 bands: band 20 reflects the highest 5 (FIVE)% band 1 is the lowest 5% and each band has approx. 3,000 usages. In other words break the 60,000 downloaders in to groups from highest group=20 to the group that use nothing or very little data=1.

Of a Friday morning, a script runs through the latest usages and updates user facilities to indicate a number for which band a user falls in to, for their 7 days previous usage.

Now this is an organic system for which you would expect the highest 5% users represent the most demanding segment requiring ever increasing bandwidth. The sort of users who deliver the 'peaks' on network graphs.

All one needs do is keep these 3,000 users confined in a 0.5-Gbit pool (a generous 10% of capacity) and on Fridays return some of these users to 'clear bandwidth' - but only if since being in the 'greedy pool' the latest calculation ranks a user in a new band, a band lower than #20.

The higher up you are in band 20 the more weeks you remain isolated. Bands 1-19 aren't really impacted nor important but one can read where he/she is stationed. If that makes sense??

Remember the hundreds of users exceeding 48 GB back in the day...what figure would that have risen to today ?
undoubtedly thousands

Disclaimer: My views and my thoughts - merely a consumer, IP(/Exetel) service.
*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.

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

Re: Back To The Future?

Post by CoreyPlover » Sat Oct 17, 2009 12:05 pm

David R wrote:From the information I've gained, or at least my understanding of it, bandwidth is being dynamically provided i.e. it will rise and fall automatically to meet the level demanded- unless management should do something to override it.
That was only my assumption about the "interesting offers" and I'm not an Exetel official. But if it is true, then it indeed opens up interesting possibilities.
David R wrote:'3 am to N' (is that shorthand for Noon?) unlimited
No, N is shorthand for "some time yet to be determined". I think it is likely to be 7am-9am.

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

Re: Back To The Future?

Post by David R » Sat Oct 17, 2009 5:03 pm

CoreyPlover wrote:determined". I think it is likely to be 7am-9am.
  • A nice place to start, 6 GB Prepaid NF + 100c/GB metering + Unlimited 7am-9am period. Call it the "Interactive No Frills Plan" and many ADSL2 users will have no troubles switching to/trialing that. (Initial offer)
Then later and as capacity allows, 36 GB Prepaid NF + 50c/GB +Unlimited 12 hours (tbd) to keep ADS1 alive - but with some weekly measurement restricting one's total 'free time' use to <18 GB/week - - unless more prepaid(postpaid) $s flow in to override the rule/release one from a pool. Call it "Schedulers No Frills". Here's hoping there's room on the graph. 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.

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

Re: Back To The Future?

Post by CoreyPlover » Sat Oct 17, 2009 5:45 pm

CoreyPlover wrote:
David R wrote:'3 am to N' (is that shorthand for Noon?) unlimited
No, N is shorthand for "some time yet to be determined". I think it is likely to be 7am-9am.
Clarifying, I suspect that "3am to 7am" or even "3am to 9am" is the intended interpretation of ForumAdmin's comments and interest:
ForumAdmin wrote:I like the unlimited use in the 3 am to N am period for a more general user.
However I can't see any of the suggestions helping formulate a plan(s) that have a longer unlimited period.
So, summarising and expanding some ideas for a plan(s) with longer unlimited period:
  • 12 hours per day unlimited, but no P2P allowed (perhaps a more generic way to formulate this plan is that a copyright infringement notice against you would precludes you from continuing to use these plans?)
  • Plans with an "unlimited pool" feature where you can opt in to switch to unmetered off-peak at any time, but naturally only a fixed allocation of total bandwidth is provided for such a pool
  • Similarly, an "unlimited pool" feature for off-peak which is charged (say, $1 per day of off-peak)
  • Unlimited use, but with rated bands. The less the user actually downloads, the higher their rating, and placing them in a less congested bandwidth pool
  • Perhaps consider a "rollover" plan. That is, unused quota from previous months roll over into new months

tr3nton
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:49 pm
Location: Darwin

Re: Back To The Future?

Post by tr3nton » Sat Oct 17, 2009 6:12 pm

In my opinion, unlimited is just an illusion. Much like gmail having a - I think - 7gb limit, which is ever expanding. However, I bet 90% of the population never get even close to this limit. So they could say unlimited storage, or 100gb or anything. They wouldnt need to have the capacity for 100gb multiplied number of users - because not everyone would ever use that amount of space. In saying that, i think an unlimited plan is a good idea - however I don't see the point in having said plan if it is only going to be unlimited between the hours of 3am and 5am - seems silly to me. Take for e.g. my connection speed - I can get at maximum usually around 150KB/s.. if my unlimited time is 3 to 5, thats 2 hours a day - which equates to a little over a gig/day... or 32gig/month - thats not anywhere near unlimited... and again, I don't see the point in an unlimited plan for non P2P (im assuming ur basing P2P on torrents? and usenet as mentioned)...

I know for me when there's something I want to download I think.. damn, have to wait for tomorrow, for offpeak period.. what would be much better - oh I can grab this now, there's no stringent restrictions placed on my connection. (not having a go at my current plan or exetel, just saying for arguments sake.. It's not so bad when I am the only user on the connection - but in a share situation you can't control what the users are doing online - which as a result has been maxing out my peak usage leaving little room for something i may need)

I would also put forth the idea that having unlimited (assuming not in a particular periood of the day), perhaps heavy downloaders wouldnt be so keen to get anything and everything they find online. As at the moment, there is the thought "oh, I wanna maximise my months downloads so I better get this now, even if I don't really want/need it".. on the other hand, if no restrictions, they can just get it when they want/need it... however this mighten necessarily be the case, as they might think "oh, i wanna maximise my months downloads" and be downloading 24/7 - and in this case, I think it would be fair to impose restrictions - i.e. booting them from the plan as has been suggested for users using P2P (torrents and usenet) on the unlimited plan.

Also, is there any thoughts of cost for such plan? At the moment, the highest cost ADSL1 1.5Mb plan is $65/month.. would it be much above this given the download usage might not be that much higher? And is it something that is only likely to be available for ADSL2?

-

As an afterthought, if exetel did introduce an unlimited plan, it would be the only of its kind, and that would be a good thing ;) - I haven't checked out AAPT's plan but if 5gb is the peak limit, this hardly constitutes an unlimited plan :)
hi

Post Reply