http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r3519156 en Sun, 29 Nov 2009 09:31:37 EDT Sun, 29 Nov 2009 09:31:37 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3520985 Softbear1 : He was wrong. You being a rr customer were grandfathered over with 3 ip's. @Home on the other hand charged for the other ip's so Cox kept it that way.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3520985 Sun, 09 Jun 2002 23:48:55 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3519156 gimmic : I've recently noticed the fact that while my friend and I are both paying the same amount for service, we get different ip lease limits.

We're in the same region(within a few miles), he's an ex-@home user, im an ex-RR user(sadly.) We're both now on the cox-HSI packetloss network.

Normally I wouldnt care about the difference of 1 ip lease, but the friend of mine is trying to get a switch and two systems going. The switch is technically a router, and it is ofcourse using an ip lease. This leaves him with one ip lease left, as his modem is pulling DEF002.cfg.

I have no problem running three systems on a hub(well, technically i have one system on the hub and two behind a router.. so im only using two leases), and we're paying the same amount per month.

When I called the tier two tech and tried to explain things and just get a basic reason why he got quite defensive and said that i was somehow getting an extra IP lease that i wasnt paying for. Everyone in the norman area is running the same configuration file, and when i explained that he just said that i was being undercharged.

I know how the cable system works, and i know cox has a configuration that enables a maxcpe of three. I would appreciate if i could get a direct reply as to why we're paying for the same service while the level of service is different. I had assumed it was due to our previous contracts(mmcable RR allowed me 4 maxcpe, his @home allowed 1) but the teir two tech said otherwise. Why exactly, he wouldnt say.

Considering the norman area is pulling an edited default cfg filename I can only assume this is due to incompetency in network design, and just an echo of the current network packetloss problems.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3519156 Sun, 09 Jun 2002 19:38:53 EDT