Cable Forum - View Single Post - New Acceptable Usage Policy from VM (discussion)

7031 · 16-11-2011, 08:19

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).

16-11-2011, 08:19	#15
7031 Inactive Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: at my desk Services: 100Mbit Broadband Posts: 95	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).