Cable Forum - View Single Post - [Merged] NTL - New 1MB / 5GB Cap

Mauldor · 17-12-2004, 01:50

I think tbh we are still missing the point:

A UBR has only so much Bandwidth - if enough people hog the line on lets say the 1.5mbit then it will cause the rest of the people connected to either have slower download or bad pings in gaming. Upload bandwidth is rarer than download bandwidth. Tarring the enitre UK with the same brush is not good though, for example there might well be lots of bandwidth left over in my neck of the woods while a major city (nottingham say) might have it all used up a lot of the time. This I can understand, so you would think then the last thing you want to be doing is increasing the bandwidth avail to customers if there is not enough to go around in the first place.

This was the reason for the "soft" cap, if a lot of people in the same area rang up about slow speeds etc - they can identify by whatever means a person in that area as a heavy user (maybe 10 of them lets say) and write them a nice letter.

Now what is been proposed (and yes its only that) is that you get XX per month - this in effect does not stop the problem above - For exmaple lets say Im on the new 3mbit - I can thus spend 5 days in a row (as a example) downloading my quota, people in the area ring up Support as they cannot go online as pings are so bad in games and there speeds are slow, cos me and a bunch of others are all using the bandwidth.

All I want to know - what is the end goal here? Yes we have covered this is Major detail many times with a shortage of Bandwidth yet each time we are giving more and more? Maybe Im missing the point?

17-12-2004, 01:50	#79
Mauldor Inactive Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Scunthorpe Age: 59 Services: 50mbit, Base TV, Base Phone Posts: 437	Re: NTL - New 1MB / 5GB Cap - should I subscribe @ 300k with NO CAP ? I think tbh we are still missing the point: A UBR has only so much Bandwidth - if enough people hog the line on lets say the 1.5mbit then it will cause the rest of the people connected to either have slower download or bad pings in gaming. Upload bandwidth is rarer than download bandwidth. Tarring the enitre UK with the same brush is not good though, for example there might well be lots of bandwidth left over in my neck of the woods while a major city (nottingham say) might have it all used up a lot of the time. This I can understand, so you would think then the last thing you want to be doing is increasing the bandwidth avail to customers if there is not enough to go around in the first place. This was the reason for the "soft" cap, if a lot of people in the same area rang up about slow speeds etc - they can identify by whatever means a person in that area as a heavy user (maybe 10 of them lets say) and write them a nice letter. Now what is been proposed (and yes its only that) is that you get XX per month - this in effect does not stop the problem above - For exmaple lets say Im on the new 3mbit - I can thus spend 5 days in a row (as a example) downloading my quota, people in the area ring up Support as they cannot go online as pings are so bad in games and there speeds are slow, cos me and a bunch of others are all using the bandwidth. All I want to know - what is the end goal here? Yes we have covered this is Major detail many times with a shortage of Bandwidth yet each time we are giving more and more? Maybe Im missing the point?