Re: Speakeasy "we don't cap" bandwidth cap. They are now capping

Author	All Replies
bobbytuck join:2009-04-07 Chicago, IL 3 edits	reply to bobbytuck Re: Speakeasy "we don't cap" bandwidth cap. They are now capping Well, the whole thing is defintely peculiar. I'm now receiving follow-up calls from a Speakeasy tech who's letting me know that I will be monitored on a week to week basis and that while there's no caps, "we'll just take it one week at a time." It's very annoying -- and very peculiar because my usage is after hours and not particularly heavy -- especially in light of folks who are saying they download quite a bit more than 160gigs a month and have never gotten a call. What I'm curious about if there might be a technical reason for Speakeasy to zero in on me. Would my nearness to Chicago have anything to do with a desire to conserve all bandwidth on Speakeasy's part? I'm not following the logic here. Could I be on a node where there might be an issue and instead of fixing the issue they're forcing customers to cut drastically down on bandwidth? Is this a business decision to transition from functioning as an ISP to functioning as a VOIP provider? I assume bandwidth is bandwidth -- but I'm wondering if this is not the case. What's particularly galling is that I'm doing no torrents whatsoever. I've made a conscious effort to switch to streaming and HD downloads -- doing what I assumed one is supposed to do. So this whole thing has me scratching my head. It's quite unpleasant -- almost as though they're afraid to put the bandwidth cap in their TOS but are not afraid to confront a customer privately.
bobbytuck join:2009-04-07 Chicago, IL 3 edits	to forum · permalink · · 2009-04-15 14:27:37 ·
kamm join:2001-02-14 Brooklyn, NY ·T-Mobile US	said by bobbytuck : I'm not following the logic here. Could I be on a node where there might be an issue and instead of fixing the issue they're forcing customers to cut drastically down on bandwidth? Is this a business decision to transition from functioning as an ISP to functioning as a VOIP provider? I assume bandwidth is bandwidth -- but I'm wondering if this is not the case. We had an issue few years back when I had to push them a bit to admit the backhaul we were running through at the time was overloaded - then I requested a transfer and 24 hours later we were on another backhaul, running fine without any problem. So the answer is yes, you can be easily restricted by your backhaul's utilization problem(s). -- [BQUOTE=[user=bicker]]Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them. [/BQUOTE]
kamm join:2001-02-14 Brooklyn, NY ·T-Mobile US	to forum · permalink · · 2009-04-17 12:02:07 ·


Wednesday, 02-Dec 15:15:05	Terms of Use \| Privacy Policy \| Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo \| feedback \| contact over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com. page compression OFF