dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
9293

anonymous_one
@dsl.bell.ca

anonymous_one to gyrfalcon3

Anon

to gyrfalcon3

Re: Unlimited Bandwidth Entitlement - Who pays?

said by gyrfalcon3:

said by b1gdr3:

Today, hopefully...read the Terms of Service much?
You mean the bogus terms of service? The ones that state "in the sole judgment of Comcast" and offer no actual definitive terms?

I never agreed to any terms of service with Comcast anyhow, so bugger off...
Wrong. By subscribing to and using the Comcast service, you also agree to and are bound by the Terms of Service that govern the service.
said by Comcast Subscriber Agreement :

By using the Service (as that term is defined below) after the Effective Date, you agree to become bound to the terms of this Agreement.
»www.comcast.net/terms/su ··· iber.jsp

SpaethCo
Digital Plumber
MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN

2 recommendations

SpaethCo to gyrfalcon3

MVM

to gyrfalcon3
said by gyrfalcon3:

And when you get big enough you get into something called PEERING... Which throws a lot of the per-gigabyte/bit costs completely out the window for an ISP as large as Comcast.
Neutral cost peering contracts generally only apply when you are providing transit connectivity that is mutually beneficial to both parties, and it generally involves a roughly equal quantity of traffic in each direction. (hint: Comcast traffic loading is heavily asymmetrical)

Transit billing is based on burst capacity, commit capacity, and overages in addition to the bandwidth rate commitment. Usage is usually billed based on 95th percentile calculations (top 5% of traffic peaks discarded), and measurement is typically done by bit-rate calculation on 5 minute intervals. That rate calculation is also why it's difficult for Comcast to publish a number. Assuming a 30 day month, 95% billing gives you 36 hours of "free" burst. The relation of bandwidth transfer quantity to billed transfer rate can vary wildly. For example, each of these cases would result in being billed from the carrier for 1mbit of traffic:

36 hours @ 8mbit + 684 hours @ 1mbit =
129,600MB + 307,800MB = 437,400MB

720 hours @ 1mbit = 324,000MB

36 hours @ 8mbit + 360 hours @ 1mbit + 324 hours @ 0mbit =
129,600MB + 162,000MB + 0MB = 291,600MB

36 hours @ 8mbit + 4 hour @ 1mbit + 680 hours @ 0.25mbit =
129,600MB + 1,800MB + 76,500MB = 207,900MB

48 hours @ 1mbit + 672 hours @ 0mbit = 21,600MB

Expecting Comcast to boil that down to a monthly transfer limit in GB is like asking your gas station to bill you based on number of miles you'll be able to go instead of by gallons.

The absolute best you're going to see in pricing from the cheapest transit carriers in the US is $7-10/mbit. It doesn't take a genius to predict what would happen to Comcast broadband costs if they maintained a 100% provisioned system, and all investors would see would be a pathetically underutilized infrastructure.

Broadband access networks are shared, not dedicated, infrastructure. You have to make a few concessions to make the sharing work, but the benefit is significantly lower pricing. If you want dedicated access order yourself up some T1s and mux them, or jump straight to DS3. Once you pay your access and service charges you can hammer on that line 24x7 and nobody will bother you. You can get dedicated service at a higher cost, or you can play nicely on a shared environment for a lower cost. I agree that Comcast should probably be doing more in the way of consumer education, but the sad truth is that it will likely result in a much less favorable situation than the one that exists today. (using the BW caps provided by other carriers as a reference)

-Eric
devnuller
join:2006-06-10
Cambridge, MA

devnuller to gyrfalcon3

Member

to gyrfalcon3
said by gyrfalcon3:

I fully understand the difference between speed and usage is. If I go to TimeWarner Telcom, Level 3 or XO and ask for a 10GE line, that's SPEED. What I push over it is USAGE
Correct. And the cost to deliver 8Mb is not usage based (you originally said @.15 cents / Gb). It is speed based @ higher prices than you pay. If you actually used 200Gb in a month you would probably peek at 8Mb for more than 5% of the time. Again the cost can be in the hundreds to deliver this.
said by gyrfalcon3:

And when you get big enough you get into something called PEERING... Which throws a lot of the per-gigabyte/bit costs completely out the window for an ISP as large as Comcast.
Incorrect. Peering just transfers the cost to carry bits from OPEX (paying someone else for (inter)national infrastructure) to CAPEX (building the infrastructure yourself). Typically the costs to do one vs the other are pretty close and are +/- based on the volume of traffic.

Many people do not understand the details around this which generates the misunderstanding

gyrfalcon3
join:2003-03-12
Minneapolis, MN

gyrfalcon3

Member

said by devnuller:

And the cost to deliver 8Mb is not usage based (you originally said @.15 cents / Gb). It is speed based @ higher prices than you pay....
Okay here is a good example... I go to TimeWarner Telcom and request a 1GigE connection be brought to my house.

That line will cost me a flat fee each month. If I want to transfer data over it, they'll either give me a guaranteed, unlimited or per gigabyte usage charge for Internet data depending upon how my contract is written.

A 1GigE line can transfer about 300 Terabytes of data each month... If my Internet access fee was .15cents a gigabyte, that would equal around $46,000 a month on top of the 1 to 2k line charge.
devnuller
join:2006-06-10
Cambridge, MA

1 edit

devnuller

Member

[deleted]

techlte
join:2003-01-01
US

1 edit

techlte to devnuller

Member

to devnuller
My point is with all the new bandwidth sensitive services both currently available and in the horizon things will only get worse. If we can't make some ground with service providers now it'll be a real struggle later on when everyone is effected by these same unethical regulations.

I for one am working on getting Verizon approved as a local franchise.. Once they get in the FIOS ball will begin rolling. It may not be an immediate solution but Verizon actually has their finger on the pulse of technology.. They further prove it with every newly approved franchise.

dadkins
Can you do Blu?
MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA

dadkins

MVM

Thanks for the blanket John!

I pay for speed. When I decide to download something, it gets here fast.
THAT is using the service.

Trying to download an entire newsserver is abuse - aka a No-No.

I do use several apps to download "big items", yet I have a hard time breaking 35GB per month.
Something somewhere is just wrong.

30-35GB per month is a wee bit more than surfing and email!
All I can say to y'all is, knock yourselves out!

techlte
join:2003-01-01
US

techlte

Member

said by dadkins:

Thanks for the blanket John!

I pay for speed. When I decide to download something, it gets here fast.
THAT is using the service.

Trying to download an entire newsserver is abuse - aka a No-No.

I do use several apps to download "big items", yet I have a hard time breaking 35GB per month.
Something somewhere is just wrong.

30-35GB per month is a wee bit more than surfing and email!
All I can say to y'all is, knock yourselves out!
What good was that post? You missed the point completely, instead of doing exactly what you and others keep doing we should be concerned with this problem. That's right, it's a problem and it'll only get worse as this imaginary limit is more widely reached. This "if it aint broke" mentality is more of a problem in my opinion then the accused abusers. Oh and 30-35 a month is more then e-mail and surfing.. I don't think I could justify what I pay for HSI if all I was doing was checking e-mail and surfing BBR like many of you.

I honestly feel service providers should clearly include a limit in the TOS. Be it based on region, city, community, street, or tier they should have actual limits. Oh and (lol) to the poster above who posted all about how the world would end and HSI service would degrade if more users were aware of A limit. please..

dadkins
Can you do Blu?
MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA

dadkins

MVM

"Those of you who pay for high speed to simply check your e-mail and visit these forums are a waste in my opinion. Everyone I know who pays ridiculous prices buys this service to actually use it. My point is with all the new bandwidth sensitive services both currently available and in the horizon things will only get worse."

What was that all about?
I *DO* use it - as it was designed to be used.
Well within the TOS/AUP.

I *DO* use these high bandwidth apps and services , yet I stay under 35GB per month.
I use Joost, Zudeo, BitTorrent... various direct download sites... Just don't see it friend.

Please explain what it is that you meant. Thanks!

tshirt
Premium Member
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA

1 recommendation

tshirt to gyrfalcon3

Premium Member

to gyrfalcon3
said by gyrfalcon3:

said by devnuller:

And the cost to deliver 8Mb is not usage based (you originally said @.15 cents / Gb). It is speed based @ higher prices than you pay....
Okay here is a good example... I go to TimeWarner Telcom and request a 1GigE connection be brought to my house.

That line will cost me a flat fee each month. If I want to transfer data over it, they'll either give me a guaranteed, unlimited or per gigabyte usage charge for Internet data depending upon how my contract is written.

A 1GigE line can transfer about 300 Terabytes of data each month... If my Internet access fee was .15cents a gigabyte, that would equal around $46,000 a month on top of the 1 to 2k line charge.
So go for it, and out of that $48,000 a month TW can afford the transit costs you accumlate.
At $57.99 a month Comcast isn't selling that kind of service.

gyrfalcon3
join:2003-03-12
Minneapolis, MN

gyrfalcon3

Member

said by tshirt:

So go for it, and out of that $48,000 a month TW can afford the transit costs you accumlate.
At $57.99 a month Comcast isn't selling that kind of service.
My point is that with a 1GigE line, Comcast could have 166 users with 6Mbps Up/Down and not be over over subscribed. Each user would need to pay ~$300. If they reduced it to 3Mbps price drops to $150, 1.5Mbs $75, 750Kbps $37, 375Kbps $19...

Now this is the guaranteed bandwidth each customer can have without oversubscribing the GigE connection. They could allow users to burst up to 10/100, they only need to allow them to be throttled when the link is saturated.

tshirt
Premium Member
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA

1 recommendation

tshirt

Premium Member

said by gyrfalcon3:

said by tshirt:

So go for it, and out of that $48,000 a month TW can afford the transit costs you accumlate.
At $57.99 a month Comcast isn't selling that kind of service.
My point is that with a 1GigE line, Comcast could have 166 users with 6Mbps Up/Down and not be over over subscribed. Each user would need to pay ~$300. If they reduced it to 3Mbps price drops to $150, 1.5Mbs $75, 750Kbps $37, 375Kbps $19...

Now this is the guaranteed bandwidth each customer can have without oversubscribing the GigE connection. They could allow users to burst up to 10/100, they only need to allow them to be throttled when the link is saturated.
so maybe (according to your research) ComCast is a pretty good deal!!?
At least for the typical/average user

NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
TP-Link TD-8616
Asus RT-AC66U B1
Netgear FR114P

1 recommendation

NormanS to gyrfalcon3

MVM

to gyrfalcon3
said by gyrfalcon3:

...1.5Mbs $75...

Now this is the guaranteed bandwidth each customer can have without oversubscribing the GigE connection. They could allow users to burst up to 10/100, they only need to allow them to be throttled when the link is saturated.
Why would I want to pay Comcast $75 per month for 1.5Mbps Internet when AT&T only charges $20 per month for 1.5Mbps Internet?

Also, are you basing your price breakdown solely on a GigE to your premises? When you share with 166 customers you also have to factor in the "Last Mile" infrastructure from the GigE node to 166 different premises. That won't come cheap, either.
NormanS

1 edit

1 recommendation

NormanS to techlte

MVM

to techlte
OK. How about 50GB per month. With every subscriber knowing the limit, and pushing toward that limit, 50GB per month may be as much as Comcast can offer by way of a limit.

IOW, be careful what you wish for...

tshirt
Premium Member
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA

2 edits

tshirt to NormanS

Premium Member

to NormanS
said by NormanS:

said by gyrfalcon3:

...1.5Mbs $75...

Now this is the guaranteed bandwidth each customer can have without oversubscribing the GigE connection. They could allow users to burst up to 10/100, they only need to allow them to be throttled when the link is saturated.
Why would I want to pay Comcast $75 per month for 1.5Mbps Internet when AT&T only charges $20 per month for 1.5Mbps Internet?

Also, are you basing your price breakdown solely on a GigE to your premises? When you share with 166 customers you also have to factor in the "Last Mile" infrastructure from the GigE node to 166 different premises. That won't come cheap, either.
Bingo!
That's exactly it. what CC is limiting is the last mile.
With cable that last mile is shared with up to 250 others.
DSL and other "Dedicate line" providers don't have that limitition, they are limited by distance.
there are ways to mitagate either limit, either by capping useage, or expanding the plant (splitting nodes for cable, remote terminals and pair bonding for xDSL) neither is cheap
In the long run CC will move to DOCSIS 3 and verizon is moving to fiber, each will then have substanially more bandwidth and expandability for that last mile.
Probably at that point transit costs will be more of a factor, and they will move to the gas pump type metering= download all you want~ watch your bill go up.

gyrfalcon3
join:2003-03-12
Minneapolis, MN

gyrfalcon3 to NormanS

Member

to NormanS
said by NormanS:

Why would I want to pay Comcast $75 per month for 1.5Mbps Internet when AT&T only charges $20 per month for 1.5Mbps Internet?

Also, are you basing your price breakdown solely on a GigE to your premises? When you share with 166 customers you also have to factor in the "Last Mile" infrastructure from the GigE node to 166 different premises. That won't come cheap, either.
I'm basing the pricing on the presumption that Comcast has to pay around $50,000 for every 1000Mbps Internet pipe they have. This figure is inflated and well above what Comcast is paying. The last mile infrastructure is already in place, just like it is for the telephone company. Dropping a cable/line to your house from the street is nothing.

Why would you want to pay $75 a month for 1.5Mbps of guaranteed bandwidth in this fashion? Because it would allow you to download 450+ gigabytes per-month (if not more) without oversubscribing the cable providers network.

You're correct that a 1.5Mbps connection for AT&T may allow you to do this if it's not oversubscribed. But if the connection maxes out at 1.5Mbps you can never bust above it and utilize whatever excess capacity the upstream Internet connection serving you has.
gyrfalcon3

gyrfalcon3 to NormanS

Member

to NormanS
said by NormanS:

OK. How about 50GB per month. With every subscriber known the limit, and pushing toward that limit, 50GB per month may be as much as Comcast can offer by way of a limit.

IOW, be careful what you wish for...
You don't need a "limit" basically all the Comcast needs to do is cap users when a "node" or "loop" becomes saturated.

If you're picking a 50GB per month limit, that would equate to throttling each user to around 200Kbps when the network is saturated.

Obliteration
Premium Member
join:2005-09-18
Somewhere

Obliteration to devnuller

Premium Member

to devnuller
Some of your analogies are horrible but here are the answers:

# If a condo includes water in the rent and you rig up an air conditioning system using circulated water from the tap, should you be able to run water 24 hours a day?

Does the condo say unlimited water is included in the rent or only a portion? If it is vague and says just water bill is included and doesn't state a limit you should be able to run it 24hrs a day and seven days a week.

# If the cost to provide this AC system exceeded your rent, should the landlord pass this cost on to all the neighbors? If no, do you think you should pay / gallon?

No and no. He should pay since he advertised it as so.

If the cost of installing this metering system is higher or other neighbors did not want to do this and would move, would it be ok to meter only the condo's that are in the top 5%?

No.

# If a buffet is all-you-can-eat, should you be able to stay there all day or come back each day (the sign did not say “today”)?

Stupidest analogy ever. A human body can only consume so much a day in a period of time. A broadband connection can consume UNLIMITED(at the top speed it can reach) amounts in 24hrs. You can't eat potato chips for 24hrs straight when you can download for 24hrs. Frankly this analogy has so many flaws that it is pointless in going into great detail. Just something else I will quickly point out. If it is says all you can eat PER meal while a broadband is per month then what? Yeah, analogy here blows.

If you owned this restaurant and 1 or 2 people cost you far more to feed than they paid, should you be allowed to refuse service to them?

NO. This is balanced by those who consume less. It is not an all you can eat if you can only eat a certain amount. the word all implies unlimited amount.

# Should you be allowed to purposely open your 802.11g router for your friends and neighbors to use your broadband connection?

If I want to, yes, I should be able.

Do you see any similarities with opening your HD share of digital media to others? Is this a violation of any ToS/AUPs?

Similarity to what? I don't know if is a violation of the terms of service or AUPs.
Expand your moderator at work

NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
TP-Link TD-8616
Asus RT-AC66U B1
Netgear FR114P

1 edit

NormanS to gyrfalcon3

MVM

to gyrfalcon3

Re: Unlimited Bandwidth Entitlement - Who pays?

said by gyrfalcon3:

I'm basing the pricing on the presumption that Comcast has to pay around $50,000 for every 1000Mbps Internet pipe they have. This figure is inflated and well above what Comcast is paying. The last mile infrastructure is already in place, just like it is for the telephone company. Dropping a cable/line to your house from the street is nothing.
Well, Comcast isn't using the infrastructure that was already in place, here. In fact, they pulled the existing cable off of the poles after installing new cable. And AT&T isn't using the same 25-pair bundle on the poles as was in place 40 year ago. They replaced the old bundle of 19-gauge wire with a new bundle of 26-gauge, twisted-pair wire. I guess the fact that the old stuff they discarded was already paid for meant that they didn't have to pay for the new stuff? They just traded in the old stuff? I don't think so. And maintenance, and repair? Every time some drunk takes out a utility pole...
Why would you want to pay $75 a month for 1.5Mbps of guaranteed bandwidth in this fashion? Because it would allow you to download 450+ gigabytes per-month (if not more) without oversubscribing the cable providers network.
There is absolutely nothing on the Internet worth my $75 per month. Not a blessed thing. That is a box set of anime every month for what? Chintzy Hollywood tinsel? More Linux distros than I can install? I really don't download that much, and I upload much less; though that side of it may change.
You're correct that a 1.5Mbps connection for AT&T may allow you to do this if it's not oversubscribed. But if the connection maxes out at 1.5Mbps you can never bust above it and utilize whatever excess capacity the upstream Internet connection serving you has.
You can't do that with cable, either; not without PowerBoost. And AT&T could offer PowerBoost. Use something like the former Bellsouth "Maxsync". Allow my modem to synch at the limits of my loop (probably about 3.6Mbps down), and cap the download to 1.5Mbps at the DSLAM.
Expand your moderator at work

TheOutcaste
@comcast.net

TheOutcaste to sago5

Anon

to sago5

Re: Unlimited Bandwidth Entitlement - Who pays?

said by sago5:

So let's talk about doing the right thing. Comcast uses a three-strikes-you're-out system of dealing with those who use too much bandwidth.
Actually, it's two strikes you're out in Portland, OR. I just got the call 1st week in February saying my Jan. Usage was too high, and if it happed again, I would be banned for 12 months, so only one warning here.

And "Too High" here was 250 GB

I will say the rep who called was very polite, but was completely unable to even approximate how much was too much, he would only say "The limit is a percentage of the total usage for the month so I can't say as it varies each month" -- even when I asked if 50GB would be too much I got that same answer.

They need to come up with some way to at least give us a ballpark figure for what is too much. At the very least, they could post what the "Too Much" limit was for the last month, or the average for the last quarter. And adding a usage meter such as they have for the newsgroups would at least let us monitor our usage.