dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
14380
share rss forum feed


ikyuaoki

join:2011-04-12
Wichita, KS
Reviews:
·Cox HSI
reply to lilstone87

Re: [NV] Received email of a Cox Data Usage Notification

said by lilstone87:

said by tmlv:

Paying for 2 lines seems kind of silly to me when you can have a Small Office Home Office account and not have a data cap... It's treated as a business account as well... It's roughly the same price, and you get a static IP with it, which is an added bonus.

Well with business class to get good pricing, requires a contact which the ETF will be you buying out the rest of the contact, if you decide to break it. Also you are going to get way less speed. High ETF for business class internet, is really a deal break imo. Internet company's have to find better ways to offer more bandwidth to customer's, without hog tying them to death. Business class internet shouldn't be the only solution to customer's who need more bandwidth, as business class internet offers many other thing's that many of us could careless about.

Trust me I have overlooked the options of business class internet, and it's simply not good enough on the ISP's part. Which now ISP's want to do the 3 strike rule for going over bandwidth, and killing a customers service for a year if they do it three times. So you really have to ask yourself, who's being fair here? Answer is not the ISP's, as they are forcing you to play by rules that are unfair, plain and simple.

Well said! I choose the more speed and also choose to pay more for more cap capacity that is simple in matters.

for business class, that offers a low speeds and no caps at all that is does not suit to me where there is a area what i want is more speed instead of low speeds and no cap on business class.

lilstone87

join:2009-04-09
Portsmouth, VA
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Cox HSI

Also you shouldn't be forced to have two of the same internet plan's, to have double the bandwidth limit monthly. I understand business class internet having high ETF for breaking contract. But who's to say just because a customer uses more then "X" set monthly limit, needs faster response time to home side issue's, or static IP's etc. You can't force customer's into business class tier's like this, because really your to the point "business" means nothing as for the type of tier it is. More like "bend over for more monthly bandwidth" tier.



ikyuaoki

join:2011-04-12
Wichita, KS
reply to tmlv

that is none of true. the business class on cable modem is subjected to the policy changes anytime.

paying for the two lines isn't silly at all. I choose to have more cap capacity what i am paying for as I pay more as it is pure simple.



ikyuaoki

join:2011-04-12
Wichita, KS
Reviews:
·Cox HSI
reply to lilstone87

the customers could be forced into the business class or pay more for additional type of tier, if customer finds too annoying what ISP purpose to have right to tell to warn the customer to limit the data consumed use, if customer do not follow the protocol rules then the ISP could terminate the customer account anytime as customer will be kicked off the network for overconsumed use.


lilstone87

join:2009-04-09
Portsmouth, VA
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Cox HSI

said by ikyuaoki:

the customers could be forced into the business class or pay more for additional type of tier, if customer finds too annoying what ISP purpose to have right to tell to warn the customer to limit the data consumed use, if customer do not follow the protocol rules then the ISP could terminate the customer account anytime as customer will be kicked off the network for overconsumed use.

What I am getting at is, I am a ultimate tier customer. I have a 400gb monthly limit, and there is no higher residential tier. So only choice left is business class internet. I have been close to my cap a couple times, and if I do ever go over by a bit. I will not be happy if cox starts to make a fuss about it, and I will let them know I am not happy. I understand enforcing a policy to protect other customer's, but to enforce it just because he went over is sad. I have no issue when action is taken due to a customer being a bandwidth hog, and it's affecting other customers in there local area.


ikyuaoki

join:2011-04-12
Wichita, KS
Reviews:
·Cox HSI

1 edit

There you go, you are on this 400gb monthly limit, you could simple additional another ultimate tier for adding to your cap monthly limit is scaled up to 800gb.

that is pure and simple what'll you pay more for this.

1x ultimate tier cost is 100 dollars per month

2x ultimate tier cost is 200 dollars per month

that is simple what you will pay more if you choose to have 2x tiers just like me


Rob_
Premium
join:2008-07-16
Mary Esther, FL
kudos:1

Why don't you just get business class? It must be nice to be able to shell out that kind of money for an internet connection.

-Rob



ikyuaoki

join:2011-04-12
Wichita, KS
Reviews:
·Cox HSI

1 edit

I am not going to be on the business class because it cost more and lower speeds than what i have on the residental.

and also the policy can be change anytime that is subject to the change conditions in matters.

I'll stick with residental where there's no contract for me. in other words for business class it requires you be on the contract locked and if you wish to break the contract then it will gonna cost you more so expensive.

I am satified with 2x premier tier right now what i am paying a 130 dollars a month as well as i gets the cap monthly is 500gb.


Rakeesh

join:2011-10-30
Mesa, AZ
Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Cox HSI

4 edits
reply to kv2009

said by kv2009:

The general idea behind data caps and limitations is a cheap business practice in order for an ISP to rake in more money. Period. When we first ordered Cox@Home (I believe it was called that back then), it was marketed as "unlimited internet" and it still should be. Bandwidth is cheap and there is no reason to have usage caps.

It's no such thing. All ISP's oversubscribe their bandwidth, anywhere between 10:1 to 50:1 is common depending on the level of service they provide to most customers (ISPs that provide lower bandwidth connections tend to go with a higher oversubscription ratio.) The reason they do this is because nobody uses their whole pipe continuously 24/7. If they were to buy enough bandwidth to not oversubscribe, it would cost a LOT more, and you'd be paying more as a result.

This works because most people don't have their internet connection at full throttle 24/7.

Truth be told, if you must do that, then you're subscribing to the wrong service. What you're looking at doing is more in-line with what a business might need if they are hosting their own services. This is why cox's business services cost more, because that level of service is intended for what you are doing. So if you must do that, switch to their business tier.

Compare it to having a LAN where on one side of your network, you have 5 computers connected to a switch, that switch has a single trunk port to another switch, and that other switch has another 5 computers. With this setup, you are working under the assumption that those computers won't all be going across the trunk at full throttle all the time.

But what if that does end up happening? Well, you're going to have to replace both switches with more expensive ones that support port channel, and then you're going to have to pay (with either your time or somebody else's time) to run additional wiring between those switches.

Realistically though, such a scenario will probably never happen.

In the case of an ISP, sometimes you end up with people who assume that because they are given a 30mbit pipe, that means they can run it at full throttle 24/7. It doesn't work that way for an ISP any more than it would work for the situation I described above. If you intended on adding port channel, you'll pay for it. Only in the case of a WAN, it's not so simple. When you need more bandwidth, you have to pay for more bandwidth. Likewise, when an ISP needs more bandwidth because you need more bandwidth, they have to do the same thing.

It doesn't stop there though. If you eat up that bandwidth in your node, then it might be necessary for them to do a node split. But why would they pay several thousand dollars for a node split just to accommodate maybe 5 people when a node split is otherwise completely unnecessary? It makes more business sense to just tell those people to get another ISP. Your ISP isn't a charity. They're in it to make money just as you do work at your job to make money.

Now you mention cox@home, well if you remember, in the early cox@home days you often had very unreliable service in most areas. They did a really miserable job at managing network resources. Needless to say, that changed.

Complaining to the FTC or the FCC won't do you any good. Any competent network engineer will explain what I just did above, and they'll basically ignore you.


ikyuaoki

join:2011-04-12
Wichita, KS
Reviews:
·Cox HSI

2 edits

that is exectly correct. Well said! who anyone thinks that cap is bad business practice things then complains to the FCC or FTC in this matters won't do any good at all. that's why i am paying a more for two premier tier lines. that is pure and simple.

EDIT: who complains about bandwidth hogs on the node unit, it is more costly to make a necessary splitting the node up that is makes a sense.

however, with DOCSIS 3.0 and above that have more channels that makes splitting unnecssary to save the thousands of dollars.



spacefunk
39 going on 12
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Las Vegas, NV
reply to JasonCable

I dunno about all the other stuff in this thread however I'm in LV and just got hit with the same overage emails, Premier Tier.

The double login is freaking retarded.


Rakeesh

join:2011-10-30
Mesa, AZ
Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Cox HSI

I've been going sometimes double my cap (500GB in a month) and haven't gotten any kind of letter yet. Yes I'm a network abuser, but unless they complain I'm going to keep doing what I'm doing.

My theory though is that since I have a contract commitment with cox, they aren't complaining.


Rob_
Premium
join:2008-07-16
Mary Esther, FL
kudos:1

I still like my compromise:

What should be exempt from the caps

1)Backups on Mozy, Cox's own back up, etc..
2)Windows/Mac updates (or updates in general) including virus definitions, anti virus downloads and maintenance
3)VOIP (skype/vonage, etc..)

-Rob



ikyuaoki

join:2011-04-12
Wichita, KS
reply to Rakeesh

you're on the business class tier? just curious.


nickphx

join:2009-10-29
Phoenix, AZ
reply to JasonCable

Bandwidth is cheap.. I have a gig-e line with hurricane electric running to my cabinets in phoenix nap. I pay them $1,000/month for 1gigabit unmetered. I can run 100% @ 1gig without a problem. HE.net has POPs in every major exchange so routing is fast and stable.. Now if I could only get them to run a line to my house...



ikyuaoki

join:2011-04-12
Wichita, KS

That would be nice if you can get this 1gigabits line to your house, you'll just pay a 1k dollars as you'd justified to pay for?


caa100

join:2004-04-02
Annandale, VA
reply to Rakeesh

said by Rakeesh:

My theory though is that since I have a contract commitment with cox, they aren't complaining.

I just committed to a contract weeks ago and got the email this week.

Worse yet, when I called to up my service tier, they would not offer me any contract pricing. Meaning that, to increase my cap by 25% (preferred to premiere) my monthly charge will be increased by 80%.

Thats the kind of thing that makes me have second thoughts before throwing out all those Fios mailers I keep getting....


ikyuaoki

join:2011-04-12
Wichita, KS
Reviews:
·Cox HSI

1 edit

contract commitment sounds like a business class with 3 years agreement contract.

on residental side, there's no contract that means you have to follow the protocol rules within a cap limits.

by myself, I made a decision to extends the premier cap up to 500GB by adding the another premier line to commit this responsiblity.


Rakeesh

join:2011-10-30
Mesa, AZ
Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Cox HSI
reply to Rob_

said by Rob_:

I still like my compromise:

What should be exempt from the caps

1)Backups on Mozy, Cox's own back up, etc..
2)Windows/Mac updates (or updates in general) including virus definitions, anti virus downloads and maintenance
3)VOIP (skype/vonage, etc..)

-Rob

And how would this compromise work?

You are STILL using bandwidth at your last mile. Take the scenario I described above. You have 5 computers trying to talk over a single trunk line, and all are going full throttle. Are you going to negotiate a deal with the switch where it magically gives you bandwidth above and beyond the capacity of its trunk port for certain services?

Rakeesh

join:2011-10-30
Mesa, AZ
Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Cox HSI
reply to caa100

said by caa100:

said by Rakeesh:

My theory though is that since I have a contract commitment with cox, they aren't complaining.

I just committed to a contract weeks ago and got the email this week.

Worse yet, when I called to up my service tier, they would not offer me any contract pricing. Meaning that, to increase my cap by 25% (preferred to premiere) my monthly charge will be increased by 80%.

Thats the kind of thing that makes me have second thoughts before throwing out all those Fios mailers I keep getting....

They allowed me to extend from preferred to premier for $15 extra about a year into my contract.

Anyways, how long were you into the contract? The contract isn't binding until after 30 days.

Rakeesh

join:2011-10-30
Mesa, AZ
Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Cox HSI
reply to nickphx

said by nickphx:

Bandwidth is cheap.. I have a gig-e line with hurricane electric running to my cabinets in phoenix nap. I pay them $1,000/month for 1gigabit unmetered. I can run 100% @ 1gig without a problem. HE.net has POPs in every major exchange so routing is fast and stable.. Now if I could only get them to run a line to my house...

The last sentence you put there is the key issue. Bandwidth is cheap, if you have access to a tier 1 provider. At the last mile though the price goes way up.

Why is that? Well, try laying single mode fiber all the way from downtown phoenix to your house. Even if you could afford all of the equipment and raw materials, the government would also want to throw a few regulations up your ass and a good measure of taxes here and there.

Rakeesh

join:2011-10-30
Mesa, AZ
Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Cox HSI
reply to ikyuaoki

said by ikyuaoki:

contract commitment sounds like a business class with 3 years agreement contract.

on residental side, there's no contract that means you have to follow the protocol rules within a cap limits.

by myself, I made a decision to extends the premier cap up to 500GB by adding the another premier line to commit this responsiblity.

The price lock guarantee is the residential contract, which includes an ETF.

Rakeesh

join:2011-10-30
Mesa, AZ
Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Cox HSI

4 edits
reply to lilstone87

said by lilstone87:

What I am getting at is, I am a ultimate tier customer. I have a 400gb monthly limit, and there is no higher residential tier. So only choice left is business class internet. I have been close to my cap a couple times, and if I do ever go over by a bit. I will not be happy if cox starts to make a fuss about it, and I will let them know I am not happy. I understand enforcing a policy to protect other customer's, but to enforce it just because he went over is sad. I have no issue when action is taken due to a customer being a bandwidth hog, and it's affecting other customers in there local area.

If you don't enforce it, heavy users might get too comfortable just filling up their pipe willy nilly. The idea behind the cap is to keep it so that they'll be conscious about downloading that 42GB blu-ray rip of the dark knight. If they do this too much, they can impact the performance of other users. Ideally your ISP wants to provide their customers with full bandwidth 24/7.

In my opinion, there is a better solution to the cap, but it would probably require an investment in additional hardware (possibly even additional CPE hardware, e.g. a new cable modem) and maybe some statisticians to develop a proper algorithm. If you get a heavy user who frequently uses up a lot of data, then you throttle them *only* during peak hours, and at a statistically appropriate amount based on how congested the node is (not some arbitrary amount, e.g. none of the "we'll drop you by half" BS that some providers do) and QoS them at all other times, also separating bulk transfers from burst transfers. This makes it so that they have no cap, but they're going to see reduced download speeds at certain times of the day and week, and they are last in line to have their packets delivered. Ideally this should be done with no noticeable increase in packet delay (aka latency, ping times.)

I'd say something like a policy whereby if they hit their monthly cap, then for that month and the next month they will be put into this category of customer, and notified of it. If they hit the cap again in the next month, they stay on it, and be notified of it.

This would allow them to be cap free, without harming other customers.

I'd be fine with being subject to such a policy myself, provided there is no observable increase in packet delay, and the throttling does a statistically intelligent and reasonable decrease rather than an arbitrary one.

caa100

join:2004-04-02
Annandale, VA
reply to Rakeesh

said by Rakeesh:

said by caa100:

said by Rakeesh:

My theory though is that since I have a contract commitment with cox, they aren't complaining.

I just committed to a contract weeks ago and got the email this week.

Worse yet, when I called to up my service tier, they would not offer me any contract pricing. Meaning that, to increase my cap by 25% (preferred to premiere) my monthly charge will be increased by 80%.

Thats the kind of thing that makes me have second thoughts before throwing out all those Fios mailers I keep getting....

They allowed me to extend from preferred to premier for $15 extra about a year into my contract.

Anyways, how long were you into the contract? The contract isn't binding until after 30 days.

I'm about 8 weeks in--past the 30 days.

I'll try again, maybe I'll get a different answer with a different rep. I'll mention Price Lock specifically.

davidhoffman
Premium
join:2009-11-19
Warner Robins, GA
kudos:2
reply to Rakeesh

I know of no way to to do your idea without increasing ping times. You are asking someone to interfere with the travel of something, without affecting its travel time. You cannot have your cake and eat it at the same time. If you want to get the attention of an excessive user, a big significant reduction in download and upload speeds, with huge ping time increase, will do it in many cases. Since many of the worst offenders are gamers, a huge increase in latency, each time they are playing, will help remind them to be more responsible in the future. If you leave them with the regular latency, they will not care much about reduced upload and download speeds, unless it is a very large decrease.

Your idea of rapid analysis for QoS is already available in the network gear supplied by Sandvine and others. The ISP has to spend enough on the network equipment to give enough headroom to do the analysis more frequently. Uh oh! ISPs today are not spending enough on network upgrades to provide decent subscriber experiences. Why would they spend an a large amount to rapidly, and with great finesse, provide QoS? It is easier and less costly to reduce speeds in big percentages for set time periods to reduce congestion or punish excessive users.

Years ago, researchers in Texas established through scientific analysis that all these fancy usage control schemes were inferior to upgrading the network continuously. They showed that, over a time period of a few decades, you could spend the same amount to do two different schemes. One was monitoring, restricting, punishing, and limiting users. The other was to continuously improve the network using upgrades in fiber optic, coaxial cable, and Ethernet networking technologies. One provided limited increases in network usability, but huge profits to sellers of punishment technology. The other provided statistically significant yearly increases in network usability and profits to those advancing network technology. Guess which scheme most ISPs decided to use? Guess which scheme appeals most to Wall Street?


Rakeesh

join:2011-10-30
Mesa, AZ
Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Cox HSI

4 edits

said by davidhoffman:

I know of no way to to do your idea without increasing ping times. You are asking someone to interfere with the travel of something, without affecting its travel time.

Of course you'll effect it, the question is by how much, hence why I say noticeable. An IPv6 solution would be to tell the MTU Path Discovery that it has a smaller MTU than it really does (fragmentation isn't allowed in IPv6 - the stack has to probe the path and figure out the optimal MTU to the destination before opening a socket.) Smaller packets can be throttled with less delay. There is the issue of decreasing the MTU of a socket already opened, however those can just be handled with normal delay, and all new ones get a smaller MTU. If a gamer runs into problems with that, simply reconnecting to the server will fix it.

Combined with QoS and tiering, you could give real-time applications low latency while throttling. I already have low latency without throttling my usenet downloads (which completely saturate my downstream bandwidth) thanks to the amazing QoS capabilities of tomato firmware. Companies like Cox already have DPI in place from the days when they used to insert the reset flag into TCP packets of edonkey filesharers, so I'm sure it could be put to work here.

said by davidhoffman:

scientific analysis that all these fancy usage control schemes were inferior to upgrading the network continuously

What kind of networks did they look at? Not all technologies are created equal, and I am dubious that they could have examined all scenarios.

Anyways you work under the assumption that there's some guy sitting behind a big desk plotting his next dastardly deed to hurt broadband deployments. Maybe there's a real Professor Chaos or Dr. Evil out there who are evil just for the sake of being evil, but chances are none of them are running a broadband provider. If the later was still profitable, I'm sure they'd go for it to outpace the competition. Any idiot will tell you that stagnation leads to bankruptcy.

The fact is, no matter how much you increase the available bandwidth in the network, you'll still end up with people who treat their pipe as if they are running a cloud service on a last mile connection. You will have to deal with them one way or another. I'm sure even your scientists in Texas would agree that last mile connections aren't ideal for cloud services, and that these guys will have to be dealt with one way or another.

Speedchaser

join:2012-12-04
Las Vegas, NV
reply to JasonCable

What really sucks about this whole thing, is that your upload is being calculated into the 250GB limit for Premiere. I downloaded 1.5GB yesterday, checked the data meter this morning and it said i downloaded 19.56GB, which is bunk . because i uploaded 18GB but only downloaded 1.5GB. So my question is if the meter says download, why is it adding the upload and download together and taking away from the monthly 250GB limit, but only calling it download???



CoxTech1
VIP
join:2002-04-25
Chesapeake, VA
kudos:76

Much of the terminology has been simplified for the benefit of less technical users. To answer the question the monthly allowances are for combined upload and download.



digiblur
Premium
join:2002-06-03
Louisiana
reply to JasonCable

And the crazy part is, its all metered the same. There's an abundance of 8 QAM256 channels on the node, not so much on the upstream side of things.


caa100

join:2004-04-02
Annandale, VA
reply to Rakeesh

said by Rakeesh See Profile
They allowed me to extend from preferred to premier for $15 extra about a year into my contract.

Thanks for letting me know that. I tried again, this time with a support rep instead of a sales rep. The support rep could not help, but did put me through to a "retention" rep.

The retention rep upgraded me to Premiere, under the same discount percentage as my previous commitment.