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

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

<channel>
<title>Not fair to ISPs in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r19739246</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Thu, 10 Dec 2009 01:33:04 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Dec 2009 01:33:04 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: Not fair to ISPs</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19740425</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/731512"><b>jjeffeory</b></A> : You've got a good point, but there is the other side of the issue. People pay for a specific speed tier that they can use any way they see fit. I used to provide a free wireless AP limited to 56k. I thought it would be nice for an emergency. If someone wanted to reserve a room online, or move some money around their bank accounts. Maybe even find better direction online. Stuff like that. I stopped only because I moved and there was already a free wireless AP in the area provided by the local coffe shop. Sometimes it's good to be nice.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19740425</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2008 20:18:09 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Not fair to ISPs</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19739246</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/244791"><b>Gilitar</b></A> : I don't normally side with large corporations, but I see where this is going. I don't blame ISPs for getting upset about this (and they will be). It doesn't seem right to charge a single dwelling consumer pricing only to have them provide access for multiple addresses.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19739246</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2008 16:59:30 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
