Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mcmanic
NTL have stated that they will be monitoring 1meg users only, all it say about 2/3meg users is they have the right to contact you if "regularly exceed their daily usage allowance, where such excessive use impacts the quality of service for other ntl broadband customers."
where does it say monitoring? - too me thats not monitoring UNLESS someone phones in and complains of bad speed in your area upon which its checked out where its going and to whom.
|
Oh ok so presumably we never upgrade until people start complaining, as we have no idea how much is being used on our network
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mcmanic
so the bit where you say "but the fact still remains that ntl will be addressing users who they feel exceed their definition of acceptable use." - has been said ever since 1.5meg was brought out and no-one unless outlined by above has been contacted.
Simple fact NTL hasn't ATM got the gear to cap us, so how can it be called capping?, it isn't - but like this post it proves that clever wording by NTL makes everyone believe that they are and follow the guidline when infact you have to be extremely unlucky to be contacted
|
Really?
The capacity exists now to check the usage of every user on the network and from that query produce the MAC addresses of all customers using over 30GB.
Of course, that's unfair until we provide a means for customers to check their usage online.
However those using a ton of bandwidth would be well advised to 'reconsider' - there's nothing stopping ntl from right now dealing with them individually, we do actually know who high users are, and they are left alone through choice not because we're clueless 'n00bs' - if you aren't hurting anyone's service you'll generally be left be.
Contrary to popular opinion the upgrade budget isn't unlimited and we all have to work within those constraints, so if a single user is affecting the service of many that's a very strong reason to consider action, and is indeed the primary concern of the guidelines. Neither ourselves nor
any cable company in the world has the resources to upgrade areas ad infinitum. All cable companies have bad areas where usage is so high there's just no chance of upgrades being worthwhile there, and these areas are either left congested or highest users contacted to try and persuade them to calm down.
I can think easily of 3 North American cablecos and an area each for them that is heavy usage and just too expensive to upgrade.