dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2013-08-26 13:00:20: For years Verizon has marketed their FiOS fiber to the home service as a superior alternative to cable. ..

page: 1 · 2 · next

swintec
Premium,VIP
join:2003-12-19
Alfred, ME
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·VoicePulse
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·RapidVPS

Small business?

Wasnt the user told to explore Verizon business options, NOT Verizon SMALL business options like he did? At least from the most recent linked thread, there is a huge difference.
--
Usenet Block Accounts | Unlimited Accounts
TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH

Re: Small business?

VZ Business is basically MCI. Small Business from VZ is still always VZ - a regular connection at business rates.

DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

1 recommendation

Re: Small business?

said by TBBroadband:

VZ Business is basically MCI. Small Business from VZ is still always VZ - a regular connection at business rates.

Just to clarify you believe a small business FIBER line should be capped at 4 TB's???

I did close to a TB over a copper DSL line for months in 2005. Never a peep from Bellsouth

Amazing. We are really going backwards here
silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA
I saw that too. Although I have to say Verizon is at least partially to blame for that mistake. They should have clarified that small business is not what they intended and that his usage would still be deemed excessive. It doesn't sound like they explained anything to him.

DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

1 recommendation

I used to do close to a TB on my SOHO DSL line.

3 to 4 TB's on a Business class fiber connection is.....well....just sad.

cableties
Premium
join:2005-01-27

'Excessive Residential' FiOS users...

fixed that.

He admits, he was on business FiOS previously, but made a valid point that "when Fios 300 came out for residential, the price drop didn't come to similar for business users"...

Since he runs servers, no brainer for FiOS to flag him... I would have tried that too!

I don't think I even get close to a TB/month... wait make that 300MB/month...
--
Splat
serge87

join:2009-11-29
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

2 recommendations

Re: 'Excessive Residential' FiOS users...

said by cableties:

I don't think I even get close to a TB/month... wait make that 300MB/month...

I don't know, maybe if you could bring that down to 150MB/month, that sounds a little excessive in my opinion.
webcobbler

join:2013-03-09
Rumson, NJ
kudos:2

Re: 'Excessive Residential' FiOS users...

I agree that when FiOS advertises their services as "unlimited", they def well should be. However, I also can see the argument that 77TB is excessive.. For Residential, NOT Business. 77TB IMO, is conceivable.

Some say that FiOS has a Soft Cap of 10TB, then you are on their radar. OK. I can see that, IF you are Residential. BUT , advertise as "Unlimited"... and you better well should be. Especially if one is running a pure Fiber base company End to End. Plus with the new 500Gbps speed, and 1Gbps. Google and FiOS , for example.

Now, 10TB today can be excessive. I Know that I use anywhere between 150GB and 200GB in my home. But, i do not have 5 kids in the house anymore. I am sure that would be so much higher, if I did.

Now the point I am trying to come to: 10TB in today's form of streaming is rather high for everyday use, given one is using the service legitly, which I bet a lot are.

However, I believe in 5 years or so, maybe sooner... that Soft Cap might go to 20TB because people will be streaming 4k / Ultra High Def in their homes. Like how Netflix says within a year, they will be UHD streaming ready with House of Cards, etc. Plus with the Sony Media Server, and others out there, Data Caps will be def tested soon.

Also, with the decline in prices of UHD TV Sets, who knows how much they will be in that time frame. Seiki's $1000 Set, comes to mind. And this is just the 1st year of this tech.

So, I do not want to get into an argument with what I just said. This is just My Opinion of the future of "Data Caps", Soft Caps, how people might use UHD media, etc.

Thanks
elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·EarthLink

1 recommendation

Houkouonchi: 1 of 45

Many years ago Sprint got in trouble for "firing" customers.
But they were right.

While I admire Houkouonchi's technical setup and application, it is a business, and he should not expect to operate at those volumes with impunity, and have the other 5 million ratepayers subsidize him. (Her?) How much would a Colo facility charge for this use?

Those who repeatedly, deliberately and conspicuously push the limits of a consumer agreement, eventually, ruin it for everyone else.

Verizon has actually been very generous, to date, but eventually, they could just shrug and apply Comcast-inspired caps - and believe me, theirs would actually be accurate and stick. Lets hope they remain happy with a 10TB soft cap.
axus

join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC
Reviews:
·Comcast

1 recommendation

Re: Houkouonchi: 1 of 45

Verizon _should_ explicitly state their caps, and not really care what those bytes are used for. This way everything is clear, and they can guarantee themselves a profit.

I don't see how Verizon explicitly stating a 5TB cap ruins it for the rest of us. I'm not saying they go out and pay for some new hardware to implement the cap, simply change the language they use to match the reality of the situation.
elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·EarthLink

Re: Houkouonchi: 1 of 45

said by axus:

Verizon _should_ explicitly state their caps, and not really care what those bytes are used for. This way everything is clear, and they can guarantee themselves a profit.

I don't see how Verizon explicitly stating a 5TB cap ruins it for the rest of us. I'm not saying they go out and pay for some new hardware to implement the cap, simply change the language they use to match the reality of the situation.

Forcing Verizon to state a hard-cap, because of the actions of an infinitesimally small minority of customers, takes away their ability to dynamically apply management techniques that benefit the vast majority of customers.

It won't be 5TB.

MovieLover76

join:2009-09-11
kudos:1

Re: Houkouonchi: 1 of 45

I agree stfu, I don't want a hard cap because they are going after 45 people who use an incredibly excessive amounts of data. I myself use 1 - 1.5 TB/month and I know my usage might be considered somewhat excessive compared to a normal user, but they don't bother me because it's not too awful. Force them to state a cap and I will undoubtedly be over that amount. Forcing companies to put in hard caps in situations like this is not a win for users, when they start flagging users at .5 to 1 TB then maybe we need to understand the cap.

For all but the smallest minority of users on FiOS the service is completely unlimited, you have to really try to use the service in a manner for which it's not intended to get into this fraction of a fraction of a fraction of users who are being targeted.
rebus9

join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
·Bright House

3 recommendations

Re: Houkouonchi: 1 of 45

said by MovieLover76:

For all but the smallest minority of users on FiOS the service is completely unlimited

No, it absolutely IS NOT.

Those users have only the perception of unlimited because they haven't hit the soft cap. Perception is not reality.

The dictionary definition of "unlimited" is: (emphasis added is mine)

1.) not limited; unrestricted; unconfined.
2.) boundless; infinite; vast;
3.) without any qualification or exception; unconditional.

The service fails to meet the definition of unlimited the moment Verizon says "your consumption is excessive".

By the way, bandwidth pricing at the datacenter is sub-$1 per megabit at sufficient commit, and sub-$2 in many more cases. So $300/month on an all-fiber FTTP network (carrier owns the entire loop) that allows sustained 100 Mbps transfers is not a completely unreasonable expectation these days.
clone

join:2000-12-11
Portage, IN

1 recommendation

Re: Houkouonchi: 1 of 45

While, in most cases, I totally agree with people who bring up the definition of unlimited (and have done it myself on numerous occasions), this guy is ludicrous. 77TB in a month on a 300Mbit/sec connection is essentially saturating the connection every second of every hour of every day of the entire month. 77TB/31days/24hours/60minutes/60seconds = 29 Megabytes per second (~300 Mbit/sec) for the entire month.

When you pay for residential broadband, you are pretty much buying it under the understanding that it's unlimited to use it whenever you or people in your household want to use it. Not to saturate the connection for the entire month. Not for setting up racks of servers to stream media to your entire family. It's is a blatant TOS violation. This is what commercial connections are for.

This guy isn't getting kicked off FiOS because he went over some cap, he's getting kicked off for abusing the network, which I absolutely agree with in this case.
Bengie25

join:2010-04-22
Wisconsin Rapids, WI
Reviews:
·Solarus

Re: Houkouonchi: 1 of 45

Commercial connections are not for high bandwidth, they are for SLAs.

Actual prices from L3 for a T1 is $300, which is 1.544mb/s, or you can get a 1gb Ethernet connection for $6,000. 20x more expensive, but 647x faster. Why? Because bandwidth is relatively free compared to infrastructure.

Why charge for bandwidth on the last mile? Because up until recently, copper infrastructure had limits. Now we are starting to get all fiber connections that have virtually no limits.

High consuming customers should have to pay their fair share, so charge them a fair price. Like rebus9 said, $2/mbit is fairly standard for guaranteed bandwidth.

Remember, bandwidth is not the same as data. 1mbit constant is about 350GB/month. What networks charge for is peak bandwidth. 95th percentile.

But yes, even then 300mbit average on a 300mbit connection is going to be at least $600 with the above.
sonicmerlin

join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH
kudos:1

Re: Houkouonchi: 1 of 45

said by Bengie25:

Commercial connections are not for high bandwidth, they are for SLAs.

Actual prices from L3 for a T1 is $300, which is 1.544mb/s, or you can get a 1gb Ethernet connection for $6,000. 20x more expensive, but 647x faster. Why? Because bandwidth is relatively free compared to infrastructure.

Why charge for bandwidth on the last mile? Because up until recently, copper infrastructure had limits. Now we are starting to get all fiber connections that have virtually no limits.

High consuming customers should have to pay their fair share, so charge them a fair price. Like rebus9 said, $2/mbit is fairly standard for guaranteed bandwidth.

Remember, bandwidth is not the same as data. 1mbit constant is about 350GB/month. What networks charge for is peak bandwidth. 95th percentile.

But yes, even then 300mbit average on a 300mbit connection is going to be at least $600 with the above.

Verizon doesn't spend anywhere near $2/mbit. They own their own backbone.
InvalidError

join:2008-02-03
kudos:5

Re: Houkouonchi: 1 of 45

While Verizon may have their own backbone, they still do not directly reach every site on the internet so they still have peering and transit costs somewhere in there too.

Even if their average price might be under $2/Mbps now, costs may increase in the future: bandwidth demand is currently increasing much faster than technology's capability to accommodate demand. Because of that, equipment and power costs in large networks are increasing 2-3X as fast as network bandwidth for a given price point and power budget does. That's why the GreenTouch Initiative was setup to bring all major players (carriers, equipment manufacturers, academics, etc.) together to try finding ways to break this non-sustainable trend before it goes too far out of control.
Bengie25

join:2010-04-22
Wisconsin Rapids, WI
Reviews:
·Solarus

Re: Houkouonchi: 1 of 45

Rule of thumb for Tier 1 ISPs. If they ask for peering, you peer.

Peering means free. If you're paying for transit, it's not peering.

example

Tier 1 A peers with Tier 1 B. ISP A is a customer of Tier 1 A and Service B is a customer of Tier 1 B.

Tier 1 A and B pay nothing to each other and ISP A pays to connect to Tier 1 A and Service B pays to connect to Tier 1 B.

Everyone wins and it doesn't matter which way the data flows because all peering connections are symmetrical and cost the same no matter which way the data moves. Even better is that when bandwidth is used asymmetrically, bandwidth gets wasted, so Tier 1 A can get free high-speed upload to Tier 1 B, which is being subsidized by ISP A, which is paying for downloads.

Now Tier 1 A becomes a residential ISP and still gets free peering with Tier 1 B. Tier 1 B doesn't care that Tier 1 A is now pulling more data from Service B because Service B pays the entire cost of Tier 1 B's hardware and the residential customers pay the entire cost of Tier 1 A's hardware cost.

Everyone pays their fair-share.

houkouonchi

join:2002-07-22
Ontario, CA
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
said by clone:

While, in most cases, I totally agree with people who bring up the definition of unlimited (and have done it myself on numerous occasions), this guy is ludicrous. 77TB in a month on a 300Mbit/sec connection is essentially saturating the connection every second of every hour of every day of the entire month. 77TB/31days/24hours/60minutes/60seconds = 29 Megabytes per second (~300 Mbit/sec) for the entire month.

When you pay for residential broadband, you are pretty much buying it under the understanding that it's unlimited to use it whenever you or people in your household want to use it. Not to saturate the connection for the entire month. Not for setting up racks of servers to stream media to your entire family. It's is a blatant TOS violation. This is what commercial connections are for.

This guy isn't getting kicked off FiOS because he went over some cap, he's getting kicked off for abusing the network, which I absolutely agree with in this case.

On small business now.

77TB was one month which was half inbound and half outbound. No the connection was not saturated 24/7. Pretty much all other months I have been in the 30s.

I really don't see how I am abusing the network. The network should be built out to easily handle a few users that even max the connection 24/7 and I know it is. I know I never saw any kind of saturation remotely local to me.
--
300/150 mbit Bonded Verizon FiOS connection FTW!
SunnyD

join:2009-03-20
Madison, AL

Re: Houkouonchi: 1 of 45

quote:
I really don't see how I am abusing the network. The network should be built out to easily handle a few users that even max the connection 24/7 and I know it is. I know I never saw any kind of saturation remotely local to me.
"Officer, I really don't see how I went over the speed limit. I didn't pay attention to the speed limit signs as I went by them."

Really?
serge87

join:2009-11-29

Re: Houkouonchi: 1 of 45

Good point...except it's a total fail analogy. There are no "speed limit signs" on FIOS so how would you know you would be going past it if you did?
SunnyD

join:2009-03-20
Madison, AL

Re: Houkouonchi: 1 of 45

He didn't read the ToS for "Small Business Services" (not in regard to the unmentioned soft caps mind you, but acceptable uses).
Bengie25

join:2010-04-22
Wisconsin Rapids, WI
More like a library saying you can't read any more books because you read too many.

That's your 14th book this week. The average citizen only reads 0 books per week, so you're consuming infinitely more resources. You're cut off.
Bengie25

join:2010-04-22
Wisconsin Rapids, WI
This is what I'm talking about. $2/mbit and another $30/month for infrastructure. I would mind paying $200/month if I knew I had 85mbit of truly unlimited bandwidth.
VerizonCynic

join:2006-10-25
Lakewood, CA
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

2 recommendations

Here we go again with the word unlimited. Lets stop using the word "unlimited". everything has limits..well except for things like "space". But when it comes to data usage we need to quit lying to ourselves. There is a limit. They just dont "want" to tell you what it is
--
Lakewood Accountability Action Group | »www.LAAG.us | Demanding action and accountability from local government

ITALIAN926

join:2003-08-16
kudos:2

Re: Houkouonchi: 1 of 45

Not once have I ever heard FiOS advertised as UNLIMITED, so honestly, I dont know why everyone has bunched up panties. Ive heatrd and seen maybe 1000 FiOS commercials in my life.
jimboe

join:2000-08-14
New York

Re: Houkouonchi: 1 of 45

As recently as a month or so ago, one of their commercials boasted via use of the unlimited.
Expand your moderator at work
BosstonesOwn

join:2002-12-15
Wakefield, MA
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
Go back to bright house, I'll enjoy my 10 terabyte limits. Same thing I said when they wanted comcast to do this, it's not sane and will lead down a slippery slope.

Next after that comes caps. And those caps will not be sane.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!"
rebus9

join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
·Bright House

Re: Houkouonchi: 1 of 45

said by BosstonesOwn:

Go back to bright house, I'll enjoy my 10 terabyte limits.

Since that reply was directed to me, I'll respond with... UM, WHAT??

What does Brighthouse have to do with it, and where did you conjure up the 10 TB number? (other than a rough guesstimate from houkouonchi's post)
BosstonesOwn

join:2002-12-15
Wakefield, MA
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

Re: Houkouonchi: 1 of 45

Since bright house is on your profile, if they are warning over 10 TB that is a ton of data for a home connection.Comcast had a limit at 4 TB before and they set their cap at 250 gig.

If you ask them to do this is going to start a slippery slope for yet another provider.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!"
serge87

join:2009-11-29
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
said by elray:

"ability to dynamically apply management techniques that benefit the vast majority of customers."

What does that mean in non-corporatespeak?

•••••
SunnyD

join:2009-03-20
Madison, AL

1 recommendation

Problem is without flat out stating what the cap is across the board, it becomes arbitrary. Without a published cap, what's to say today's 10TB becomes tomorrow's 5TB, and what was my "legal" usage all of a sudden becomes non gratis? Worse yet, there's nothing saying that region A gets the same soft cap as region B, again, because there's no official published number.

Either post the official limitations of the service and DON'T call it unlimited, or make it unlimited and deal with that 1%. Can't have it both ways.

•••
Bengie25

join:2010-04-22
Wisconsin Rapids, WI
Reviews:
·Solarus

1 edit

1 recommendation

Good luck finding a colo that only provides non-professional services.

Most colos charge an arm and a leg because they have limited room, limited power, and are VERY well connected.

This guy only has a single internet connection, with residential power, and a non-datacenter grade setup.

He doesn't need all that other crap that gives him 5 9s disaster recoverey, and why should he pay someone else for services he can provide himself?

All he wants is a residential grade connection where he can pay a fair prices for the bandwidth he uses.

I hate how ISPs have no middle ground. Either your residential and get a data cap and "no servers", or you need 9s and a dedicated line.

I don't need 5 9s, I just want some flipping bandwidth. Sell me BANDWIDTH!

edit: by "very well connected, I've seen some colos advertising that they are directly connected to over 1,000 different networks while having an additional 3 different Internet Exchanges, each with redundant paths.

That kind of bandwidth is expensive. It is low latency high quality bandwidth. I don't need to run a stock-exchange out of my house, I don't need to worry about microsecond jitter. Give me residential quality bandwidth, but on an all you-can-eat platter and for a price that the ISP makes money, aka "fair". I just want the option.

••••••
nanaki333

join:2010-08-11
Chantilly, VA
you can get a server at 100tb.com on softlayer bandwidth, which is like the best, for $200/month. burstable to a full gigabit, which i have no problem hitting.

anonome

@verizon.net
You're quite mistaken. Nobody else is "subsidizing" any one customer no matter how much his/her usage amounts to. Every customer "subsidizes" everyone's usage to one degree or another since everyone pays relatively equally for having the network exist at all. The only way that one customer accounts for more usage than others is for him/her to take advantage of periods where utilization is low or even practically non-existent. One customer's usage doesn't affect any other customer's usage or experience at all, nor does it cost Verizon anything extra. That's the way networking works.
Bengie25

join:2010-04-22
Wisconsin Rapids, WI
Reviews:
·Solarus

Re: Houkouonchi: 1 of 45

" Nobody else is "subsidizing" any one customer no matter how much his/her usage amounts to. Every customer "subsidizes" everyone's usage to one degree or another since everyone pays relatively equally for having the network exist at all."

Truth.

It is ironic that a network is only as useful as the number of people it connects.

Kind of like Google saying "We're going to start charging ISPs to connect to us", then suddenly Google has no customers and the ISPs have less value for their Internet services.

Unless you're a small ISP, bandwidth is relatively cheap. I can't see the bandwidth costs being more than the cost of enforcing data caps.

justin
..needs sleep
Australian
join:1999-05-28
kudos:15
Reviews:
·iiNet
said by elray:

How much would a Colo facility charge for this use?

It depends if it is incoming or outgoing. Funnily enough many hosts often charge only for outgoing. So he *eats* 70TB a month but sends out only 100gb a month then the bandwidth would be free. In theory.

Just for comparison the bill at the host for dslreports.com comes to 5 cents per gb, so a 70TB bill - if it were outbound - would be $3500 per month. If it were an amazon setup, and outbound, the price would be double that. On top of the server costs.

These are the data center costs for bytes. ISPs charge for speeds and provisioning a service, they tend to assume total traffic is going to average under maybe 100gb over many subscribers, and thus not be a factor in pricing (sub $5/month).
Bengie25

join:2010-04-22
Wisconsin Rapids, WI

Re: Houkouonchi: 1 of 45

Datacenters charge by bytes going out because their incoming data is virtually idle and their out-going data is under high load and nearly all servers send during peak hours.

High-end dedicated colo's don't charge by data transferred.

houkouonchi

join:2002-07-22
Ontario, CA
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
said by elray:

Many years ago Sprint got in trouble for "firing" customers.
But they were right.

While I admire Houkouonchi's technical setup and application, it is a business, and he should not expect to operate at those volumes with impunity, and have the other 5 million ratepayers subsidize him. (Her?) How much would a Colo facility charge for this use?

Those who repeatedly, deliberately and conspicuously push the limits of a consumer agreement, eventually, ruin it for everyone else.

Verizon has actually been very generous, to date, but eventually, they could just shrug and apply Comcast-inspired caps - and believe me, theirs would actually be accurate and stick. Lets hope they remain happy with a 10TB soft cap.

Colo is cheaper. I had a full rack before with 20A of power (far more than I use) and 1gbit connection with 100mbit 95th percentile commit for $600/month (only around $230 more than my fios). My 95th percentile is probably around 120mbit on FIOS.

My issue mainly stems from the fact I know how much bandwidth costs. You can get under $2mbit from many providers these days (even tier1 ones). When your talking about just increased load on your own network because your tier 1 like VZ the cost is well under $1/mbit.

Most other providers have to deal with limited (and expensive to increase) capacity at the last mile. This isnt the case with VZ. I am mainly putting load at the backend. The thing is I *know* they are still making money off me yet they pull this crap.
--
300/150 mbit Bonded Verizon FiOS connection FTW!

••••

FFH
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

Running servers is prohibited - what doesn't he understand?

Running servers is prohibited by the TOS. What about that is hard to understand? The fact that Verizon doesn't boot every user running a server( which for most people is little or no extra traffic) isn't a defense.
--
"If you want to anger a conservative lie to him.
If you want to anger a liberal tell him the truth."

•••••

anon14859

@comcast.net

So......

How about clearly listing the max bandwidth you're willing to tolerate with the service in clear text? They're playing advertising tricks and then complaining when people actually exceed some imaginary line. While this guys use was clearly excessive and he knows he was wrong 110%, it should have been clearly stated to begin with, not some hidden fine print that eludes to some artificial non-specified limit.

••••

tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Comcast

1 recommendation

Not suprised that there is..

...a limit, or too surprised the account sales people mumble a bit, during that part of the terms of service.
They are sales people directly or indirectly getting paid to sell.
Too bad in the pursuit of market share, that verizon fails to CLEARLY disclose those limits in their ads and sales docs.

baineschile
2600 ways to live
Premium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI

Remember When

....FiOS was the "Godsend" of ISPs, and was going to change the industry? Now, they are on the verge of capping users?

I honestly think that Google Fiber will do the same thing. Caps, and required ads.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

SteveLV702
Premium
join:2004-04-22
Las Vegas, NV

wanna come setup my servers?

like his setup..... need that rack setup for all my servers in my closet...
toro

join:2006-01-27
Scarborough, ON
kudos:6

Large family

He must have a very large family to need so many servers and HDD arrays.

••••••••

noc007

join:2002-06-18
Cumming, GA
Reviews:
·Comcast

So he's an ATSC DVR for his family

Based on just this article, it sounds like he's running a big DVR like setup for his family. I think his family needs to setup their own DVR, HTPC, and/or start streaming the shows from the content providers, Hulu, or Aereo. Nice of him to set all that up, but he's either going to have to spend even more money on a different business class service like Metro-E or cut them off. I can't imagine how crazy his electric bill must be.
iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX
kudos:2

Re: So he's an ATSC DVR for his family

Yeah. It's telling when you realize that collocating all of that equipment in a data center would run him, at minimum, $500 per month. Probably closer to $1000.
cramer
Premium
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:8

Re: So he's an ATSC DVR for his family

Actually, several thousand... full rack, power, and the terabytes per month he's using will not be remotely cheap. 100mbps flat-rate (a) won't be fast enough, and (b) will either be expensive from a reliable source, or cheap from rather unreliable sources. (where "reliable" is not just a measure of internet connectivity) Given the value of the hardware he has, nobody would put that in a cheap trashy colo.
RJW1678

join:2003-01-15
Wilmington, DE

3 edits

1 recommendation

Just my opinion

Since Verizon wants houkouonchi to reduce his usage by 80% to 90%, in my opinion Verizon might be over selling FiOS bandwidth and then they penalize customers who continually use 100% of what the customer is paying for. FiOS used to be advertized as unlimited and no slow downs.

Later
Bob W.

•••
Bengie25

join:2010-04-22
Wisconsin Rapids, WI

1 recommendation

Unlimited

"Unlimited" means no limit ever for any reasons.

We need someone to set a legal precedent and wtfpwn this false advertisement.

•••••••••••••••••••••
tmc8080

join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY
Reviews:
·ooma
·Optimum Online
·Verizon FiOS

TB's

The average user who does lots of video (and has many users-- say a family) could easily push their usage into the TB's... The internet's content has grown exponentially. This means we've come a long way from consuming a mere 250gb per month on average.

So, between 1 & 100tb is the issue. If Verizon sets an artifically low(ish) cap in the low tb's this can put many consumers in the radar. This would also be a factor which deciding which carrier to choose.

•••••
guppy_fish
Premium
join:2003-12-09
Lakeland, FL
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

This isn't your average user

If I recall from the last time this came up, it was shown his use of his service includes being a TOR proxy and probably the largest amine Torrent seed on the planet. Both are in direct violation of the TOS, first would be for providing bandwidth to others being a vpn proxy and the other for copyright thief, on a scale that I'm amazed the FBI SWAT team hasn't paid him visit. This individual should be thank full he is getting the boot, if the Copyright owners found him, he would spend the remaining years in court or worse
mrwiggles

join:2013-06-10
Sherman, TX

Re: This isn't your average user

If he is coming out and publicly stating that he is operating as a dvr for his family, you can sure bet that the broadcasters and FCC are going to pay attention and investigate this. Maybe Verizon will willingly help those entities just so they can get rid of him. If those family members do not physically live at his address and would otherwise have access to the content, he could be found to be a broadcaster and get sued to kingdom come for royalties.

David
I start new work on
Premium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
kudos:101
Reviews:
·DIRECTV
·AT&T Midwest
·magicjack.com
·Google Voice

1 recommendation

He's the same one

That complained and left when at&t had caps.

77TB a month. Yeeaaah... not buying his story in the least. I didn't buy it then, I definitely ain't buying it now! I am going to fathom to guess but his next connection will be Kansas city with Google fiber.

Stuff like this is the reason why we end up with caps.
--
If you have a topic in the direct forum please reply to it or a post of mine, I get a notification when you do this.
Koetting Ford, Granite City, illinois... YOU'RE FIRED!!

batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ

1 recommendation

Re: He's the same one

said by David:

his next connection will be Kansas city with Google fiber.

Google already knows everything he does online.



linuxuser

@verizon.net

what a muppet

if verizon starts capping users. it is because of muppets like houkouonchi who take advantage of things

Mike
Premium,Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:1

5 recommendations

Re: what a muppet

The soft cap appears to be 10 TB.

I'm ok with this because it's so astronomically high that it doesn't matter for anyone who does anything reasonable.
System System Post
this topic has been closed

Reason: run its course

Chris123NT

join:2001-11-24
Nesconset, NY

77TB?

77 TB is absolutely insane, but reading the article the Verizon rep says something that perked my interest. Looks like he's running a full fledged VPN service for people to stream stuff they might not have access to in their country. Big no no there in most Res/Small Business ISP's.

Even with a setup like that I'd be hard pressed to use any more than the ~10TB that would be the point of getting a letter.

I've had problems with ISP caps before, specifically the whole Cablevision upload capping they did for about a 5 year period before competition made them stop, but I don't have a problem with VZ stopping guys like this. I was sympathetic to him at first but 77TB? Yeah, no.

••••

batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ

consuming more than 77 Terabytes in one month alone.

Darn, that is one fine service; sad I can't get it because I'm still waiting for my free MCI phone.

tito79

join:2010-03-14
Brewster, NY
kudos:1

Re: consuming more than 77 Terabytes in one month alone.

Because of this numbskull we will get capped

batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ

Re: consuming more than 77 Terabytes in one month alone.

said by tito79:

Because of this numbskull we will get capped

Not I, my 4G from Verizon is truly unlimited at $10 a gig. That is only $770,000 for 77TB.

I do find it interesting that this illustrious group, for the first time, has defined excessive. Though I still don't like lying, slippery, back slapping sales people.



TamaraB
Question The Current Paradigm
Premium
join:2000-11-08
Da Bronx
Reviews:
·Optimum Online
·Clearwire Wireless

3 recommendations

Business is Business no?

I can see legitimate business uses for that setup. A news agency feeding several news channels to off-shore offices with DVR service so writers and editors can stay current on the news would be one.

If Verizon is selling unlimited BUSINESS service, and then complaining about usage. it's not providing what's advertised and should be liable to law suits.

In this entire thread all I hear is 77TB/Mo is excessive for home usage. Ok, that's fair enough. But BUSINESS service that's advertised and sold as unlimited?

Someone building a business based on advertised FIOS service and then get's their connection pulled for using it as advertised has a valid reason to sue IMHO.

--
"Remember, remember the fifth of November.
Gunpowder, Treason and Plot.
I see no reason why Gunpowder Treason
Should ever be forgot."

"People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people"


••••••

anonome

@verizon.net

1 recommendation

Who needs caps...

...when you're being blocked at the "peering points" by "peering disputes" (aka "we're too cheap to keep our network updated to support our customers' usage needs").