site Search:


 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery






how-to block ads


 
Search Topic:
Share Topic
Post a:
Post a:
AuthorAll Replies


funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5

1 edit

reply to Rob

Re: I don't get it...

said by Rob:

It was through their complaints, that the FCC took notice and started to investigate.
Rob, the FCC had nothing to do with the caps.

Footnote 3 in "FCC New Network Management Technique" addresses Comcast's position directly:
These congestion management practices are independent of, and should not be confused with, our recent announcement that we will amend the “excessive use” portion of our Acceptable Use Policy, effective October 1, 2008, to establish a specific monthly data usage threshold of 250 GB per account for all residential HSI customers. This excessive use threshold is designed to prevent any one residential account from consuming excessive amounts of network resources as measured over the course of a month. That cap does not address the issue of network congestion, which results from traffic levels that vary from minute to minute. We have long had an “excessive use” limit in our Acceptable Use Policy but have been criticized for failing to specify what is considered to be “excessive.” The new cap provides clarity to customers regarding the specific monthly consumption limit per account. As with the existing policy, a user who violates the excessive use policy twice within six months is subject to having his or her Internet service account terminated for one year.
said by Rob:

Comcast continues to upgrade their network. The caps have nothing to do with the network - it has to do with the cost of bandwidth. It's all about bandwidth.
Not only do I think you're right about that, I think that the 250 GB amount is still a net money-loser for Comcast. That doesn't make the cap a good thing, I'd prefer no cap. But if they're going to have a cap, it's good to have it disclosed.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...


S_engineer
Premium
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL

There is a correlation. The lower the latency, the more bandwidth available. Or, how many transactions per second are being accomplished. Its all about response time.
--
The "Lifetime" channel is responsible for 83% of all divorces...Robert Ginty



funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5

1 edit

I understand. I agree with you that the Cap and the prioritization are related in probable effect. Comcast shouldn't need both.


Wednesday, 30-May 17:55:09 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.
Most commented news this week
Hot Topics