New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

http://community.virginmedia.com/t5/...cy/td-p/849239

VM are updating their acceptable usage policy. Thought you guys should know so you can have input. They're removing the detrimental usage policy now which is a big step forward for me:

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

I find it hard virgin are just going to remove that policy.

Maybe they'll bring out a hard cap, say go over 1TB a month then 50% throttle until next month? Cant see virgin allowing folk download 5-6TB a month for the same price. Maybe they customers wont be offered a retention deal?

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

They better not launch a download cap!

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Me too. They'll need more aggressive shaping or there will be more areas suffering high congestion.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

STM is still in place so you can't really hammer the service constantly. If shaping works properly it should basically result in high bandwidth utilisation for VM's core/edge but end users not getting effected for time critical applications or regular use.

BT Infinity doesn't have any caps but they do shape aggressively at prime time.

As I high user (average 500gb, sometimes as much as 800gb) I don't have any issues with that.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

There's no STM on 50Mbps and over. The shaping can be circumvented. Judging by what I saw happen to my own area it only takes a single heavy user to make a significant impact if the base load is already borderline or close to that. I could see very sudden changes in the TBB monitor that I can't see was co-ordinated action by multiple users and those changes coincided with periods of beyond dire performance. A single 100Mbps customer uploading flat out will consume over 50% of the local pipe until they hit the 6GB STM.

If the threatening letters are being scrapped then I suspect that what replaces them to keep the network humming without it impacting VMs bottom line will probably be less acceptable to heavy downloaders than the letters were.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

I suspect VM don't have a choice but to remove the detrimental use policy if they still want to be able to twist words and claim "unlimited" use. http://www.cableforum.co.uk/article/...ted-use-claims

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

That could be, but they have published a draft proposal which has nothing of the sort. I'm also wondering how they're going to manage this and I do think it's a marketing strategy.

I think a prime time period between 16:00-00:00 like Sky do is fine.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

There will be a new traffic management regime to go with the new AUP for sure. There never was anything in the AUP that mentioned shaping, STM etc. and that is what will be used instead of the letters.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Well bt infinity gets here in march 2012. And i have just signed up for 100mb, if they start making big changes to the current system, do you have grounds to cancel your contract as it is in effect a reduction in service???

The (Talk) at the moment says there is (Personal usage allowance) in the pipeline, if that were the case surely you could cancel as that would be a reduction in the service you receive!

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

I don't know if it was present in the old AUP but section 6.5.1 could be abused to legally disconnect anyone they choose.

My reasoning for this, is, as written, the simple act of me sending an email to a friend asking if they are OK, is technically an unsolicited email as they didn't ask me to send it, and therefore in breach of the written AUP. This section should really be rethought.

I know what the intent is, but we all know that clever people can twist badly written rules like that to enforce the literal rule and not the spirit of the rule.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Yes it is:

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Ah, but the wording is slightly different, "groups of people". It puts a slightly different, and more acceptable spin on the rule. As written in the new AUP, just sending a friendly but unexpected email to a single friend is breaking the AUP.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

why, you download 24/7?

that would be the most sensible thing VM have ever done in recent times. However its also extremely unlikely as marketing leads that company.

This move is simply to comply with a recent ASA ruling.

I do expect STM to either change or be removed also as the same ruling forbids throttling that is more than moderate, STM kills 75% of speed so is more than moderate. Also worth mentioning the top 2 tiers have no STM at all for downloads as well as protocol throttling which can be evaded. The upload STM is very weak in comparison to the download STM and isnt present on the top tier.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

I wouldn't be a fan of a usage cap, but having said that, it's better than a detrimental usage policy, as at least then people would have an idea of how much bandwidth they have available.

Whether or not I would stick with VM though would really be down to what kind of caps we're looking at. 1TB or so would be nice, 3TB would be awesome (can't imagine myself using that much, but still, it's always nice to have additional bandwidth available).

I am a heavy user though - people will probably ask how on earth I could possibly use as much bandwidth as I do, but according to my router, I use around 400GB per month download, 129GB upload. Recently my usage has been very high but I don't expect this to continue (server harddrive backups to local server) as I'll be sorting out something dedicated with SoftLayer soon (got 1 server there, thinking of adding a backup server either with them or with another cheaper company, as well, performance isn't so important for a backup server).

In regards to STM, I'd prefer that they used a system where it was more QoS priority based. Rather than having hard caps, just set it so torrenters / people downloading large files etc have lower priority than people who are receiving streaming content. If I'm downloading a large file, or having something backed up onto my home connection anyway, I'm not going to mind if it takes a bit longer. Speed is more important for smaller files and streaming content as far as users are concerned than larger files bigger than 1-3GB or so (think movies).

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Cue umpteen versions of what folks would like to see the new policy to be.

I'll kick off with a model which most will conform to...

Anything I happen to want to do is fine and will be set to top priority on QoS and anything anybody else does that potentially slows down my stuff will be banned/blocked/heavily penalised.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Sounds good to me. Let's be honest here, anyone who needs bandwidth who isn't me should be banned from the network immediately, as their usage would degrade the quality of my service to the point where I will have to cancel, as only getting 50Mbps for 25 pounds per month that's not even dedicated is simply unacceptable.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

If it were me the usage cap would depend on the product.

3tb on the bottom tier is almost the same as unlimited, 1tb would also be too high as its the same as caning it 30% of the time. But on the top tier the 100mbit service 1tb would be a more reasonable limit, whilst the bottom tier perhaps 75gig a month.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

I'd be happy with a 1TB limit, just make sure that I'm aware of it.

Hmm, what about 3TB? SoftLayer gives me that :P. Saying that, I'm not paying Virgin Media $294 per month, and that's with a discount (Xeon 1270 3.4Ghz quad with 16GB RAM, 500GB HDD, 100Mbps with cPanel/WHM).

Will they? I don't believe most customers even know this policy currently exists - I'm pretty sure people are downloading pretty much as much as they like anyway. Traffic shaping would work nicely for torrents though, but please don't cripple them :P. I have a friend in Canada who is lucky to exceed 100KB/s on her Roger's Cable 30Mbps connection with torrents.

I have noticed they do traffic manage torrents currently, and I'm fine with it - if it's something I'm torrenting it's not likely that I need it immediately anyway, just don't make it something ridiculous like a cap of 100KB/s.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

I'll guarantee that those whose downloading screws their local network will know about it because they've had a letter already. Lifting the threat without curbing their usage some other way will either cause problems locally or cost VM money to upgrade. I know which of those two possibilities I think would be more likely. What I think is even more likely is a more aggressive traffic management regime. Time will tell.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

There is new traffic management coming I think but as usual VM are very slow and have no idea when it might be coming live.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

The only policy I will ever support is adding more capacity. Limiting people is not a solution, it rips off customers and creates new network problems like the massive bandwidth and latency spike bang on 9PM when the STM period ends.

The current limits are also unreasonably low. Less than 1 hour of HD video in the evenings on the better of the two 10 meg tiers? And they call that "unlimited". What a joke. I would upgrade but since there is no chance of getting a proper modem I have to wait for them to fix the Superhub and then attach my router to that.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

1st half of 2012.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

I think we'll find, what with the change being timed for first half 2012 which is coincidentally the same as the planned launch of Youview, that a more Youview compatible STM policy will be introduced.

Once Youview gets hold what will be deemed reasonable usage will become significantly higher. It has to otherwise most people will end up being STMed which is not the goal of STM. I think STM was aimed at reducing the over-usage of the top 5% of users? Something like that.

Doubtless all the ISPs are having to get some major capacity work done as a massive change in UK usage patterns is about to take place.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

I think STM like all traffic management from all ISPs is aimed at saving the ISP money by limiting the bandwidth demands of their customersregardless of what any words published about it may claim.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

VM replied to my question about how they're going to tackle 'abusive' users;

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Cheap, fast, unlimited - pick any two out of three.....

Otherwise, expect to pay more.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

True, but what constitutes reasonable use will have to change as average usage levels change. If most people are getting STMed then VM will have to change the speeds they claim to sell. VM cannot allow this situation whilst BT are upping the bandwidth on their products.

This is an opportunity for VM because I suspect that many ISPs will not be ready in time to offer high speed broadband which many families will want when Youview arrives. BT will be VM's only real competitor until the other ISPs can sell on BT's fiber system.

There will be STM, as I can't see hard capping working, but the levels of what is acceptable use will be rising very sharply over the next two years as Youview beds in. A real spike in bandwidth usage growth patterns as opposed to the smoother pace of change the market here has been used to. VM will certainly be aware of this and will be getting changes in place. Either that or someone important at VM will be laid off quite soon now.

As soon as someone works out that all a Youview box needs is a couple of USB ports on the front for some game controllers and it can function as a channel for the new streamed online gaming services being launched now, there will be a second big boost to this rise in normal bandwidth use. Interesting times ahead.

This is why I've upgraded to the 50meg product when I could probably stick with 30meg if I wanted. I shall be needing the lack of downstream STM for the Youview release. Shame it was delayed a bit, but at least I'm ready.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

How do I only pick the first 2 on a cable product?

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

[QUOTE=AndyCalling;35331584]I think we'll find, what with the change being timed for first half 2012 which is coincidentally the same as the planned launch of Youview, that a more Youview compatible STM policy will be introduced.</quote>

Well currently the limit on 10 meg is 1500MB per evening, which is less than 1 hour of HD iPlayer (720p) or YouTube (720p, 1080p).

Virgin has opposed Youview form the start and will need to roll out new STBs (at their own cost) to support it. Evening traffic will rapidly shoot up as people expect to simply access VOD on their living room TV.

If anything STM will just get even worse than it is now as they try to fix Youview for all the customers complaining.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Which won't happen. Virgin are committed to TiVo as their next generation TV platform

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

The Acceptable Usage Policy is not Acceptable:td:

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Superhub has been fixed now, at least it has as far as modem mode being enabled so you can link your own router properly.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Seconded. Mine runs fine with my Linksys E3000 with DD-WRT in modem mode. Having said that, supposedly the SuperHub actually runs OK now on its own.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Certainly before the firmware upgrade it was a form of STM for many on it's own - use wireless for more than half an hour and it would hang. I can only assume those who claimed it was fine must have had different firmware.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Wow - way to go for a tenuous link.......

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

They could setup arrangements so that at least the external peering wouldn't load their networks much as they could host a youview server themselves internally within the VM network. Obviously this won't be any good for local utilisation issues though.

It's interesting how usage is changing and I do hope competition forces the ISPs to increase bandwidth and roll out products, even for a premium price, consumers would want due to the way they use internet.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Given most people think 25 quid a month is a premium price I wouldn't bet on it.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

I don't know about that, once people realise that in order to enjoy VoD and gaming on demand they need high quality connectivity they will pay. Or alternatively the carriers will charge the content suppliers and they will past on their costs with higher monthly charges. So either way they will pay.

They can sign up to their £5 a month service and get cut off for over-usage and will realise they need something more substantial. People's usage is massively changing with adoption of on demand services.

At the moment people pay a lot of money per month for phone, internet and TV. If that can all be delivered over IP networks then it could be a similar fee as you're getting the same services.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Yep my shub in router mode has not had to be rebooted since the upgraded software was uploaded. It has been off once but that was because it was unplugged by mistake :dunce:

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

That's what they claimed, but when you look at the STM policy when it was introduced and as it has evolved over the years that simply doesn't make sense.

Many ISPs around the world use the same "top 5%" claim, but I really don't believe it.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Thing is those are the most common uses of the internet. YouTube and iPlayer et. al are extremely popular and people rightly get upset when they don't work. Gaming, especially via XBOX Live and PSN, is also a very common everyday use. If your basic service can't support the most common applications and you expect a premium for them you won't last very long.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Personally I would like to see a monthly limit 100gb-10Mb, 200gb-30Mb, 300gb-50Mb & 500gb-100Mb with those over using allowed amounts restricted to 10% of their paid for tier till the end of their paid month.
As a user who DL's about 50gb from usenet & about 30-50gb on OD progs + general internet I do feel agreeved that others in my area are using their net that is detremental to my personal use. I will add that 95% of my DL's are done after I go to bed 11pm onwards.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Sorry but thats total %^&* I currently pay £48 a month for just my internet and for that amount i will do as i please,

thank you sir!!!

Don't think having a fixed amount a month is gonna work,

Who the hell is gonna sign up for 100mb broadband at £48 a month with a
500gb limit, not while ive still got a hole in my [Mod Edit - do not use language that invokes the swear filter]!!

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

And this month has been quiet so far!!!

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Cant see that happening any time soon because then they wont be able to advertise as unlimited and since thats the current buzz word for ISPs they wont be willing to drop it.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

I probably would if no congestion.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

There are only so many Linux distro's you can download ;)

What your saying is that you are quite happy to swalow up all the availiable bandwidth to the detriment of your neighbours without caring yet they are\could be payng the same as you? I'm alright Jack?

Sorry but even if it wont happen at anytime soon I hope it does so that those that DO abuse any AUP do get penalised.

Also I know that DOCIS 2/3 use different freq's so you wouldnt be an issue for me, but if I were paying for 50/100Mb & someone such as yourself was raping & pillaging all availiable bandwidth I wouldnt rest until VM done something about it. Sorry but thats how I feel.

---------- Post added at 20:42 ---------- Previous post was at 20:39 ----------

It's a shame that these so called "buzz words" mean so much to so few who feel the need to abuse a system that could be detrimental to other users.

For me we have no real choice over ISP as where we live the max we could achieve over copper is 3Mb. I dont really care for an "unlimited" service I would rather pay for a guaranteed speed regardless of the oiks who DL films to sell at boot sales.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Quality over quantity :D
I Think I would agree, I could be considered a heavy user but would happily keep my usage within predefined limits if they where reasonable and if they could be measured at the tap (Modem/superhub). I know the hub does give a per-session bandwidth monitor but mine reboots so much recently its pretty much useless.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

At the end of the day VM should not be pushing faster and faster speeds if they can't support them, don't get me wrong iv'e got nothing against stm,

I don't mind doing my downloads overnight, but i object to the idea of set limits every month!

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

I get unlimited water but I don't leave te tap running all night.....

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

(((((Hey Fella Read This))))) I currently pay £48 a month for just my internet and for that amount I WILL DO AS I PLEASE,

thank you sir!!!

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Not quite - you'll only do what VM feel like allowing you to do. You may well consider you are entitled to run flat out 24x7 but £48 isn't enough to pay for that.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Where did i say that i run flat out 24/7 ? ? ?:confused:

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Where did I say that you do? From your usage shown you obviously don't.

I only said you may feel that you are entitled to because you never specified exactly what you expect only "I WILL DO AS I PLEASE".

BTW how can BB only cost £48? 100Mbps is £45 unless you don't pay DD and then I think it's £50.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Not sure was on 50mb before and that was £38, so they said 100mb was only £10 more a month, thought this was the price!!!

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

New customer standalone prices are £21 £28.50 £35 and £45. Maybe you have the phone as well? If not you need to call in and get it corrected.

Regardless of VM advertising the service as unlimited it certainly isn't - bandwidth is a limited resource. Somebody regularly downloading high volumes will probably have an adverse effect on others in their area. The local pipe capacity is 200Mbps down 18Mbps up and that will be shared by 100 or more customers. One user on 100Mbps flat out up and down will soak half the local downstream and more than half of upstream.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

I think its significantly more than 100 sharing the downstreams. The idea of 100mbit per customer without STM been workable on 200mbit capacity is truly shocking.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

It may well be. I know Ignitionet said something about the CMTS port becoming unstable if it had to handle over 250 modems. Even at 100 I'm amazed it can ever work but I know that when I had 50Mbps I normally got that and it's only recently everything went to rat's - just after the area got the 100Mbps upgrade which may or may not be a coincidence.

I think that VM banked on selling 100Mbps to folks for willy waving rights rather than the only thing that makes it more useful than 10Mbps - bulk downloads. Sadly those buying it quite rightly expect to be able to use it and do and there simply isn't the capacity at the local level to support it.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

I agree I think they expected sales of 100mbit to be extremely low to the point there was no point allocating capacity to it. However even a sale of just 1 in any given area can significantly change utilisation. I would expect the majority of people paying for 100mbit to be heavy users.

I noticed 3 things in my area.

1 - upstream degraded when the upload speeds were uplifted.
2 - downstream speeds degraded within month of 100mbit been launched and now significantly degraded to the point its almost 24/7 and severe at peak times.
3 - increasing number of outages (maybe I am over 250 on port) or more likely seems rebalance work with each occurance adding users to my port.

The 250 reference from ignition which I am sure he will willingly correct me if I am wrong I think is to upstream channels.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Hmm. My stereo can reach a far higher volume than I use, which I paid for, but if I turned it a the way up to 11 for the day I would think my neighbours would have every right to ask me to pull my neck in. Isn't this the same issue? Still, a bit more capacity would be better as VM are running with the equivalent of paper thin walls.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

That rings a bell - I think it was.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

You can download how ever much you want without effecting anyone if you just keep it after midnight. That's such an easy solution to the issue. The issue isn't people downloading more than 1tb, it's when they do. VM need to educate customers about this. They did this to me with the letter they wrote me about the 9am-9pm restrictions.

I would imagine that I'm one of VM's best customers in terms of not effecting other people even though I use between 400-900gb a month. I barely use my connection throughout the day, I actually posted a graph of my most recent 24 hour period in the thinkbroadband results thread. But when it's after 00:00 I hammer it for at least an hour sometimes three.

Someone using their internet connection 'legitimately' to stream HD youtube after work is effecting other users more than a heavy downloader who downloads over night. So my point is it's not heavy users, it's the time of usage that's critical.

No question a heavy user should be penalised by shaping if they are downloading at peak times. But for me in that scenario it makes no sense to have a connection over 30mbit since I can't use it when I want.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Pretty much true I'd say.

The problem with that for VM is that if they advertised that how would they ever sell anything over 10Mbps? If somebody has to schedule their downloads then they really can't care if they take an hour at 100Mbps or 10 hours at 10Mbps. Unless of course you need more than 45GB a day...

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Exactly!

That's why I was initially really pleased VM removed their letter policy as I downgraded my connection from 50mbit to 30mbit due to that. So it's a bit of an issue for them as I really don't see the point having a 100mbit connection that will get shaped when I try and usenet download. So now I think the letters were a good thing.

So my point is VM's strategy is all wrong, educate heavy users or do what telephone operators do and classify bandwidth as peak time and nonpeak time. So you can say off peak bandwidth is unlimited, peak is limited but to help everyone. Any of their competition who doesn't well good luck trying to deliver a service when people are downloading 1tb during peak hours a month!

Oh and it is annoying if people are hogging up all your roads bandwidth but rather than being upset at those people be upset at the company supplying your service. It's up to them to manage their own resources.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Not quite, as I have congestion after midnight until at least 3am, usually 4am. It then starts again between about 8am and midday depending on the day. So VM have over commited themselves outside of peak as well as no isp should be congested at that time of day.

If 2 100mbit users are at it during off peak then any other user on any tier will cause all 3 to be affected.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

I'd guess that they offered 100Mbps just to cock a snook at BT. If they get a few customers in the same area actually using it in anger at the same time then say goodbye to any semblance of reasonable performance for anybody else nearby.

---------- Post added at 15:31 ---------- Previous post was at 15:26 ----------

That's really only going to bother night-owls though. For scheduled downloaders (who are almost certainly causing this) it really doesn't matter what time they complete.

Agreed although many will see congestion starting with the start of their published free-for-all periods.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

If the 200mbit to each street value is true that's pretty shocking. They cannot provide a good 100mbit service then, it's pretty much a joke. 2 users just isn't enough capacity!

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

it wont be 200mbit to each street, much less then that. My cabinet serves multiple streets and I believe it doesnt have its own port to itself.

Kwikbreaks I am a nightowl ;)

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Uh, I'm a night owl, most my surfing/chatting/downloading is done between the hours of 11pm -> 5am.

VM do NOT need to move all the downloading to post-midnight. They need to fix their bandwidth issues properly, not just move the goalposts.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Going back to the old analagy of I have xxx so therefore I will use xxx
So if you own a car do you drive it like a loon because it\you can or do you drive in A, Accordance of the law B, With care & concideration to other road users? I would guess the latter, so why not be considerate to other users in your area?

Oh & there is no need to use "CAPS" I can read & understand quite well in lower case.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Each downstream channel is capable of 50Mbps so those areas with 5 channels get 250Mbps. Of course some only have 3 downstreams but I don't think they sell 100Mbps on those.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Right, so you really think that Youview boxes are going to be watched only after midnight? And that streaming gaming services are only going to be played whilst in bed? I think you are underestimating the potential popularity here.

Usage patterns are about to radically change in the UK. Yes, there should be management to keep the top 5% in check. The rest of us should be able to expect ISP provision to allow us to continue with our normal usage patterns. To restrict normal usage to after midnight is madness. VM and other ISPs will have have to move with the times or fail. They have no choice.

By the way folks, Tivo has noting to do with this. VM may add Youview to their Tivos, or they may not. It's their business and if they want to encourage Tivo users to pick up a Youview box from the Supermarket to go beside their cable box then fine. I suspect many may find that they don't spend enough time watching the cable box after a while to justify the cost, thus VM will be helping recession hit families save money. Very socially conscientious, I will be impressed with VM if they stick to their guns on this. Many VM users do not buy cable TV anyway though, and will be using Youview and expecting it to work well. If VM point at the Tivo and tell people to use that instead they will lose custom big time. Needless to say, they will not be doing this whatever their vision of next gen telly currently is.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

You watch TV only after midnight? Sure, it is fine for BitTorrent or whatever, but that isn't the problem. The problem is video on demand, i.e. iPlayer, Youtube, 4od etc. That is what causes the problems in the evenings and VM have set their (un)limit so low that on a 10 meg connection you can't even watch a whole hour of 720p video without being throttled (and effectively cut-off).

There is only one solution to this: VM upgrades their network.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Once Youview takes hold you can be sure VM and other ISPs will upgrade their networks. They will have no choice, so you don't have long to wait. Doubtless the work is already going on.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

If none of them do (which is what I expect considering the cost) then it will be Youview that fails. There simply isn't enough capacity to support widespread use of VoD over IP networks.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

The solution is 8 downstream channels

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Which requires new modem/routers for the bulk of VM customers as well as infrastructure changes. I really can't see that happening quickly.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

If the broadband market is as competitive as consensus tells us it is what could happen is firms increasing market share by competing for VoD. So the marketing team would start talking about how unlike company X with us you can view VoD whenever you want in HD quality.

However if companies want to keep their margins the same they won't increase capacity unless net neutrality is compromised and VoD suppliers pay for extra bandwidth themselves, but the end user ends up paying regardless.

But from the sounds of it it seems VM's local network infrastructure just isn't equipped for it. Does anyone know how FTTC would be any better? I'd assume with them they could easily scale up to a gig circuit going into to a cab which is 5x faster than VMs 200mbit pipe.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

FTTC guarantees 15Mbps per customer, so for each 66 customers they provision a single GigE to the cabinet.

When it reaches the fibre within the FTTC exchange/headend it is then handed over to the ISP on GigE or 10 GigE and the service provider then decides how to contend the service from there.

FTTC doesn't suffer the same skinny pipe issues that cable does, it's guaranteed bandwidth to the cabinet, zero contention, guaranteed to the point where there's never going to be any contention between cabinet and exchange, and fatter core network pipes from that point on.

Doesn't mean there's no contention, depends on the service provider, but it's deeper down the network.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Sounds like VM need to take on Paul Daniels as a director because they'll need to be pulling some pretty impressive rabbits out of hats when BT roll out the high % coverage they say FTTC will have.

That said there's no contention on ADSL back to the exchange either (obviously) but the huge price BTw put on the leasing of their end of circuit kit means that ISPs ensure there's plenty of contention there.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Where does the number 66 customers come from? Is that the average number of customers on each cab? If so that sounds pretty impressive, so you're guaranteed 15mbit bandwidth even if everyone on your road is hammering their connection.

Re: contention down the network. How does that work with leased lines? Do they ever contend further down?

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

indeed, FTTC is much superior to cable as a tech, and the tables are turning.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

BT provision at least a Gig for each 66 customers, they are contractually obligated to provide 15Mb.

Leased lines should have no contention at any point though of course this isn't necessarily the case.

On FTTC it depends, the operators can purchase as much or as little capacity from Openreach and/or Wholesale as they please. Wholesale do contend, quite heavily, as do BT Retail which is why there's quite aggressive P2P shaping on Infinity, though oddly they don't shape newsgroups.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Could VM move to a system similar to BT's? They have the fibre, decent quality copper and cabs in place. They would need to replace all of the kit in the cabs and CPE which wouldn't be cheap of course.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Yes but absolutely no point nor business case. There's already way too much investment in the DOCSIS network. The next big upgrade will be fibre to homes, it moves closer all the time.

---------- Post added at 22:48 ---------- Previous post was at 22:47 ----------

Upstream bonding too.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Can someone please point me to the latest traffic management fair usage policy. My usual link isn't working.

Thanks

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Here you go

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

VM's throttling of their network is a joke. If their system cannot handle whatever traffic it has at the moment, then they should stop selling broadband, and upgrade their network. For every new or upgrading customer they get, the network is getting squeezed a little bit more. If parts of their network are that tight, they should not be allowed to further dilute the service they provide by adding more customers. What do you think would happen if they began removing all of the HD channels from their TV service, because their system couldnt cope with the amount of TV customers they had.

If they are moving towards a "Monthly Cap", they had better make it fair. Forget these quotes of 75 or 100gb a month for 10mb. It should be at least 5 times that, or make these amounts the "peak" time cap. I mean, who would want a service that only allowed you to download 2.5gb a day, regardless of what time it is downloaded.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

If you want that sort of uncontended service, you should be willing to pay for it (that's what businesses do).

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

If that was aimed at me, I do pay for it. It is what i have at the moment. But what they are moving towards is making the service worse than it is at the moment, so they would still be getting the same payments for a poorer service. And there was me thinking that technology, service and value for money were supposed to improve over time, not get worse.

I have no problem with Virgin "managing" their network. I just believe that it should be done properly.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

So why not enlighten us with how you think it should be done. ?

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

How to fix it? Well I would start by telling them they cannot sell any more new or upgraded broadband packages, until there current system can cope with their existing customer base.
If one person downloading large amounts of data can slow down their network, then they really have to have a serious look at their infrastructure, and upgrade it accordingly.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

:clap:

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

My apologies - I did not realise you paid for an uncontended Business Service; I was confused by your Services stating you had "L" Broadband.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

I do have the "L" package. I am not wanting a totally uncontended service, i am wanting a service that is no worse than i have at the moment. But according to some, Virgin are moving towards Monthly caps as part of their acceptable use policy. And if you read the posts on this thread, some of the suggestions beggar belief. By all means, have a capped monthly amount, but make it realistic and also take into account what time of day the downloads happen.

At the moment, and for the last few years, I can download, say, 10gb a night between midnight and 8am and not be penalised, but if they bring in a monthly cap, there is a good chance that i will be. Is that progress? I think not. Also, if the network struggles to cope if i download at full speed on a 10Mb service, then how can they justify adding or upgrading more connections on the network, especially if these new connections are 30Mb or even 50Mb.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

Some how i don't think it will be a monthly cap. It will be something far worse that means you will not be able to use the present workarounds to defeat it. If it is what i think it will be then forget your linux iso's in prime time as it will see how much you as a individual have downloaded of a set amount of a certain protocol and slow that protocol down just on your connection if you exceed that amount.

So if you are tonking the newsgroups at 7.00pm as soon as you exceed a set amount it will slow just the news group traffic ???

This is not official so don't quote me on any of this but all you need to do is use google to see what other major isp's are doing or implementing and work out if UK isp's will go the same way.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

I imagine it will be based on a simple byte count and completely protocol agnostic. Congestion is dependent on bytes only not protocol so why involve protocols in a solution to congestion when VM have already amply demonstrated that they can't identify P2P or NNTP with any certainty at all.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

http://networkmanagement.comcast.net/ is probably a good guide. In some ways it's a best practice.

Re: New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)
 

I read some of that. Typical corporate lawyer speak for "rather than spending our time and resources on building the best possible system for our customers, we will restrict their use of our existing network, whilst spending what little amount of revenue we want, on an advertising campaign that is about as truthful and upfront as a politician"

The wording on that document implies that one person, on the lowest broadband speed package, can cripple their network. How bad must the worlds broadband networks be, if none of them can cope with several heavy downloaders, on their lowest packages.