<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Re: Yep, where is the upstream. in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r19093464</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Sat, 28 Nov 2009 15:28:15 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Nov 2009 15:28:15 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: Yep, where is the upstream.</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19093464</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/939879"><b>openbox9</b></A> : There's a cost for everything.<br><br>Take your pick. More upstream would equal:<br>- Tighter caps<br>- More shaping efforts<br>- More expensive service<br>- Lesser service quality<br><br>All-in-all, 1.5 Mbps is fairly good IMO for a residential account...especially for that price. Yes, it is out of proportion with the download bandwidth, but I assume the 50 Mbps is there mainly as a marketing tactic. "Hey, look how fast our service is."]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19093464</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2007 19:18:07 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Yep, where is the upstream.</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19093396</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/581141"><b>compton</b></A> : Companies don't want to give too much upstream, because it costs them money. Their way of controlling cost is to limit upstream. ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19093396</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2007 19:07:49 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
