| What am I really paying for? My ISP is a little unconventional...
I used to work for them, but they are very secretive about how their system works because they are afraid of competition.
This ISP provides "broadband" to places not within areas serviceable by cable or telco.
My access to this network is through a 2.4ghz directional 802.11b/g antenna mounted on the side of my house with a small mainboard and wifi radio. I connect through there to an access point somwhere far off in the distance, which is presumably mounted on the side of someone elses house, which is then connected to another access point in the same way. All in all, i have 3 hops to go before i am in the cloud.
now having installed for them, i know all of the clients are dhcp based and always have a 10 dot ip address.
but my ip address is always the same, 64.27.5.211 and there are thousands of results on speedtest.net for my ip address that i havent submitted. i know this would be expected in a dhcp environment because the ip addresses get cycled, but my ip address has been the same since i signed up with this isp, even though my hardware has been replaced several times and gets rebooted constantly.
it seems to me that we are all sharing the same ip address. is that fair?
i am unable to do things like host a server on my computer or use bit torrents because of this limitation.
basically I want to know, is it right for me to be forced to share an ip address with a few thousand people? |
|
| Not sure where "fair" comes into it unless you were misled somehow, which it doesn't sound like in your case. If you decided it was a bad deal because of this limitation, couldn't you just cancel? |
|
| well it's one of these situations where they have me by the b@lls you know? satellite is garbage and we don't get 4g here yet... ill drop them for 4g for sure.
i feel was i was misled because i think internet access should go two ways, and i am unreachable from the cloud. i have never heard of an isp sharing one ip address for all of it's customers. it just seems unprofessional, and frankly they are not a very professional bunch.
i feel like i'm paying to share someone else's broadband... 20 miles away from me.
ok so scratch "fair" and sub in "legal" then what do you think? |
|
| reply to crops
Like is it legal to sell a service as "internet" when it's crippled in that fashion? Not having any legal expertise I could only speculate, but I would guess that in many places there might not be anything illegal about that aspect at all. Otherwise I'm not sure what exactly you are thinking might be illegal about it. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Choice Cable TV
 ·Coqui/PRTC
| reply to crops
Your concern is mostly that you are not able to run a server. Many ISPs don't care much if you do that or not. Some expressly forbid users from running servers. What about yours? Do they say in their terms of use that servers are not allowed? If they don't I would take it that they don't care and in this case you are indeed being crippled. Or probably this is just the way for them to avoid that users run servers through their service. |
|
|
|
 RhaasPremium
join:2005-12-19
Bernie, MO | reply to crops
They are simply nat'ing their customers. Common practice for smaller ISP's and in no way Illegal. Many times smaller ISP's can not justify a large block of addresses from their upstream provider or they are charged an exorbitant amount for those IP's.
--
I survived Hale-Bopp! |
|
| reply to crops
Thanks for the replies.
Yeah I think you're right about that rhaas... oh well.
I am actually most concerned about using BT, but when I brought that up to him before, he said he doesn't care if I can't use bit torrents because it is illegal (wrong), so I figure he can't say anything about me wanting to run a server. I'll have to check that contract I signed with them, I don't remember any language about servers not being allowed. I didn't know an ISP could willingly stop you from running a server though. I'm paying for and using the same throughput, who are they to tell us how we can use it? |
|
Reviews:
·Choice Cable TV
·Coqui/PRTC
1 edit | said by crops:I didn't know an ISP could willingly stop you from running a server though. I'm paying for and using the same throughput, who are they to tell us how we can use it?
It's their network, it's their throughput and certainly, they can tell you how and how not to use it. The problem with servers is that they can hog their upload capacity to some extent. They counting on the fact that nearly all users are interested in download speeds and not upload and they probably don't have nearly as much upload capacity if many users decided they want to set servers. Some do have the capacity but will want you to get a business or commercial account (more expen$ive) if you want to run a server.
Torrents per se are not illegal. But it is a fact that a nearly everybody uses them to obtain illegal content. It's the same thing as P2P. Using P2P is not illegal. Downloading copyrighted is what is illegal. |
|
| reply to crops
Look, I understand the bandwidth requirements to run a server, that's not even the issue here.
Anyway, I'm unable to access some websites because they think im trying to dos them apparently (ticketmaster).
I get it, there's nothing I can do about it. I should put them out of business, ugh.
*edit*
And as far as the p2p thing... o man, I don't even want to get started on that. |
|
