VM admit that STM hours vary without notice - Page 3

23-03-2008, 21:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

I'm not doubting they will change in some areas, considering the times have already changed this year.

Can you confirm that not all areas will be upgraded to 50Mb, as per your previous post about VM not wanting to perform upgrades?

VM can simply not afford to upgrade all area's, not for a while yet, around 70% of the network will be upgraded this year.

Rest wont be touched until VM has the money to do so.

Even when those area's are upgraded for 50mbit, it may lift weight off the docsis1 network but the 12-9 weekend STM will be staying...but that's because some area's having nearly 6 times the amount of users its supposed to have.

Woodgar · 23-03-2008, 21:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheNorm

Why don't VM use a "rolling" STM system, where high users are capped only when the network traffic is heavy? If traffic is not suffering, there is no need for STM.

For example, if traffic is 90% capacity at 8.30pm, the top 3% downloaders (over the past hour) are capped. The situation is reviewed every half hour.

Interesting idea, and it would make it more fair.

If the stated aim of STM is to Ã¢â‚¬Å“punish those abusing the systemÃ¢â‚¬Â, then it would certainly seem to be fairer to use a more controlled method of capping rather than the blanket system we have now where everyone is capped irrespective of their actual affect on other users.

Toto · 23-03-2008, 21:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by TraxData

VM can simply not afford to upgrade all area's, not for a while yet, around 70% of the network will be upgraded this year.

Rest wont be touched until VM has the money to do so.

Even when those area's are upgraded for 50mbit, it may lift weight off the docsis1 network but the 12-9 weekend STM will be staying...but that's because some area's having nearly 6 times the amount of users its supposed to have.

Asuming of course that VM move 20Mb customers to DOCSIS 3. OK, no new information then, I thought you may have more information that may not be in the public domain. Thanks.

AmAtoL · 23-03-2008, 23:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by TraxData

I can assure you, STM times are going to change in some areas, if you want to know how good my info is you can go back and look how i've been right every time so far

Again, this is only for area's that are really oversubscribed.

There have been numerous times where people have been shaped way before 4pm, that was because of the STM trials.

As for where i got the info, someone high up at VM =)

I've heard that they might be thinking of backheeling the top downloaders altogether to relieve stress on the system.

They might want to try backheeling all those that can't pay the damn bill first

Toto · 24-03-2008, 07:22

What does "backheeling" mean?

ceedee · 24-03-2008, 07:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

What does "backheeling" mean?

What you do to a football to pass it behind you?

Always wanted an excuse to use this:

AmAtoL · 24-03-2008, 09:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

What does "backheeling" mean?

Eh ?

It means to get rid of unceremoniously, to do away with, and generally lose these "customers".

May or may not be correct but we'll just have to wait and see, something will have to happen to save the network as I can't see DOCSIS3 being the Holy Grail for VM.

Toto · 24-03-2008, 09:33

OK, never heard of that expression before. I'm Welsh, A rugby fan.

So, VM actually getting rid of high users, now there's a PR disaster in the making.

piggy · 24-03-2008, 13:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

OK, never heard of that expression before. I'm Welsh, A rugby fan.

So, VM actually getting rid of high users, now there's a PR disaster in the making.

imo it would a very good move downloading whores should be banned no isp needs/wants them the only problem is what is a acceptable figure!! (ill get my coat

)

Sirius · 24-03-2008, 13:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by piggy

IMO it would a very good move downloading whores should be banned no ip needs/wants them the only problem is what is a acceptable figure!! (ill get my coat

)

So i take it that Virgin Media are wrong in your eye's then.

Quote:

Coping fine

“We have seen a rise in traffic from things like iPlayer but we are in an excellent position in terms of bandwidth and we don’t have an issue with that type of traffic," the spokesperson said.

“Ultimately we provide an unlimited service and whatever data people choose to receive, we will cope with that demand.

“That is our position with regards to our unlimited packages.”

http://www.techradar.com/news/intern...r-april-267152

And i take it you want me off the network then./

Mar 23, 2008 (Sun)
Mar 24, 2008 (Mon) 14.58 GB

Mar 16, 2008 (Sun)
Mar 22, 2008 (Sat) 121.73 GB

Mar 9, 2008 (Sun)
Mar 15, 2008 (Sat) 349.11 GB

Mar 2, 2008 (Sun)
Mar 8, 2008 (Sat) 214.04 GB

Feb 24, 2008 (Sun)
Mar 1, 2008 (Sat) 6.70 GB

Feb 17, 2008 (Sun)
Feb 23, 2008 (Sat) 163.50 GB

BTW

Most of that was HDtv epps that VM seem fit NOT to provide via there V+ HD box.

If VM decide to provide Linear HD channels then my bandwidth usage might reduce a bit. Until then i will have to get my HD fix via the usual locations

24-03-2008, 14:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirius

So i take it that Virgin Media are wrong in your eye's then.

http://www.techradar.com/news/intern...r-april-267152

And i take it you want me off the network then./

Mar 23, 2008 (Sun)
Mar 24, 2008 (Mon) 14.58 GB

Mar 16, 2008 (Sun)
Mar 22, 2008 (Sat) 121.73 GB

Mar 9, 2008 (Sun)
Mar 15, 2008 (Sat) 349.11 GB

Mar 2, 2008 (Sun)
Mar 8, 2008 (Sat) 214.04 GB

Feb 24, 2008 (Sun)
Mar 1, 2008 (Sat) 6.70 GB

Feb 17, 2008 (Sun)
Feb 23, 2008 (Sat) 163.50 GB

BTW

Most of that was HDtv epps that VM seem fit NOT to provide via there V+ HD box.

If VM decide to provide Linear HD channels then my bandwidth usage might reduce a bit. Until then i will have to get my HD fix via the usual locations

I best not show my usage, i had people on here moaning at me for it last time

AmAtoL · 24-03-2008, 14:33

It is a tricky one indeed, for a start I don't think that unnamed source from the quoted atricle is in the real world. The VM network is in dire straits, speeds are abysmal for the most part, quality is even worse. Yet he says it can take even more...yeah right.
If it was up to me then yes you would be off the network Sirius, 1000 gig in a month, give or take, is taking the proverbial, and you probably aren't even in the top 3%.
That's a lot of HDTV content, more than anyone can reasonably watch, maybe that's just me though being out at work all day.
Still, you are paying your money and taking advantage of your right.
Tell me that people rapi, sorry, making full use of the bandwidth available aren't affecting my pings and packet loss and I will be happy.

24-03-2008, 14:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmAtoL

It is a tricky one indeed, for a start I don't think that unnamed source from the quoted atricle is in the real world. The VM network is in dire straits, speeds are abysmal for the most part, quality is even worse. Yet he says it can take even more...yeah right.
If it was up to me then yes you would be off the network Sirius, 1000 gig in a month, give or take, is taking the proverbial, and you probably aren't even in the top 3%.
That's a lot of HDTV content, more than anyone can reasonably watch, maybe that's just me though being out at work all day.
Still, you are paying your money and taking advantage of your right.
Tell me that people rapi, sorry, making full use of the bandwidth available aren't affecting my pings and packet loss and I will be happy.

You realise its not so much people downloading 24/7 that is effecting your connection but the p2p guys constantly uploading...as thats where the VM network falls flat on its...well yes.

Then there is the cloners as well.

ceedee · 24-03-2008, 14:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmAtoL

Tell me that people rapi, sorry, making full use of the bandwidth available aren't affecting my pings and packet loss and I will be happy.

We're not affecting your pings and packet loss.
Well, not as much as over-selling the service in already congested areas anyway...

I often wondered how VM came up with that "3% of users are heavy downloaders" statistic until I realised that they were including all the broadband subscribers who weren't actually online at the time.
It's the only logical explanation for setting the cap^u^u^u, sorry I mean, *limits* so low!

Sirius · 24-03-2008, 15:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmAtoL

That's a lot of HDTV content, more than anyone can reasonably watch, maybe that's just me though being out at work all day.
Still, you are paying your money and taking advantage of your right.
Tell me that people rapi, sorry, making full use of the bandwidth available aren't affecting my pings and packet loss and I will be happy.

There are 5 people in my house. They all watch different things at different times of the day. A good HD TV ep runs in at 9 gig. Then there is streaming TV from 4Od and the BBC. Then Youtube and the likes, It all mounts up when there are 5 users using the connect. And before you get on your high horse the users are me, my wife, and 3 kids and the youngest of those is 19 years old.

I don't upload on torrents there far to insecure, i only use Newsgroups.

If VM decided to drop the unlimited then yes i would leave complete with my 2 TV drives with the full package and phone. There is always Beunlimited, BT, Sky