Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ianathuth
Contention on cable is felt most at UBR card level and no matter how big the network is or how fat the pipes are after that. It is what users on a specific UBR card do that affects service most and several 24/7 leechers on the same card can be a big problem. The solution would be to add extra UBRs which are very expensive or to cap the heavy users. Why should an ISP spend thousands of pounds on upgrading just so that a very small minority of customers can continue to download the entire internet 24/7.
|
I do hope I haven't made myself out to be a leecher in the few posts I've made in this thread. In fact, I upload far more for my connection than I download (obviously I don't actually upload as much, but when you're uploading about 25GB per month on a 128Kbps upstream connection compared to a similar amount on a 750Kbps downstream connection, you get the impression that you're actually uploading more seeing as it's happening pretty much all the time). I guess I might be classed as an upstream leecher, I don't know.
I don't
really have a problem with caps, and I think that GrahamD has quite a good idea (see below). I'd be happy with, say, a 50GB/month cap on a 2Mbps downstream connection, and when you hit it you'd drop to 300Kbps. What I'd really like is to have a 300Kbps upstream connection with the 2Mbps package and a 500Kbps upstream with the 3Mbps one.
Put it this way - I'd rather have a faster upstream and a downstream cap than a slower upstream and unlimited downstream transfer.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by GrahamD
Personally, I would be much happier with the idea of a cap, if it was not a hard cut-off. If exceeding the cap meant that you were restricted to 300K for the rest of the month, you could still carry on with "essential" surfing (buying birthday presents, paying bills, webmail, etc).
|