Lex Luthor
Premium,Mod
join:2000-09-17
Hicksville, NY
Host:
OptimumOnline
Users Find Hot Deals
Users find Hot Dea..
Requests for Hot D..
| Capping Discussion Here Only - Part 4
The other one was getting too long, so here's a new thread.
I've created this thread and made it sticky so it always stays on top.
ALL cap discussions from here on out will be contained in this one thread.
If you want to know why you were capped, here.
If you want to know how to not get capped, here.
If you want to complain about OOL and how horrible they are, here.
If you want to defend the caps, here.
If you want to discuss this new policy, not here. Send me an IM and I'll be happy to discuss it.
I promise you I am not trying to stifle discussion of the subject (I think that's pretty clear from my actions to date). I am just trying to restore sanity to this forum by keeping this all in one place, so it doesn't overtake everything else.
Please post everything related to the new OOL capping procedure in this thread.
Thank you.
Lex |
|
GeekNJ
Premium
join:2000-09-23
Waldwick, NJ
| Here are the previous parts of this ongoing thread:
»Capping Discussion Here Only - Part 3
»Capping Discussion Here Only - Part 2
»Capping Discussion Here Only
--
Have you tweaked your OOL connection? |
|
rustypixel
Rustypixel
join:2001-03-23
Old Bridge, NJ
clubs:  
| reply to Lex Luthor
OK, I've been an OOL user for about two years and I've always had great UL & DL speeds. Lately it's been taking me longer and longer to email myself files at work and I know I've been capped. I would love to read the one hundred billion posts on the matter but all I really want to know is if I call OOL and have them uncap me, how will I be able to stay uncapped knowing that I'm always sending myself large (graphic) files at work? Can I ask the OOL 'people' to monitor who is getting these files so they can see that it's just one email address only? Thanks to anyone for posting any suggestions.
--
Out of my mind and out of control! |
|
GeekNJ
Premium
join:2000-09-23
Waldwick, NJ
| How big are these emails? Most emails are 10MB or less, no? Also, ftp'ing might be a more optimal solution as emailing attachments makes them even bigger then they are if you could ftp them.
Run a test at »nyc.speakeasy.net and post the URL of the results page here. If your upload is 150kb or less, you're likely capped.
--
Have you tweaked your OOL connection? |
|
rustypixel
Rustypixel
join:2001-03-23
Old Bridge, NJ
clubs:
| FTPing is an option that I never thought of. I'll have to look into that. Anyway, another question popped into my head, was everyone capped or was it only a select group that just happened to UL more than 'usual'?
I ran the test and here is the URL. I hope I did this right.
Speed test
--
Out of my mind and out of control! |
|
GeekNJ
Premium
join:2000-09-23
Waldwick, NJ
| Yes, you're capped.
It seems to be folks that upload an excessive amount over an extended period of time. Is it really that you were only sending emails? According to the FAQ, an email can only be 20MB in size. That won't get you capped.
--
Have you tweaked your OOL connection? |
|
rustypixel
Rustypixel
join:2001-03-23
Old Bridge, NJ
clubs:
| said by GeekNJ  :
...an email can only be 20MB in size. That won't get you capped.
I do a lot of Photoshop, Flash and Illustrator work and I will regularly send myself 5 to 15 emails that are anywhere from 7 to 15 megabytes. Not to mention that I take a ton of pics with a digital camera and I email those shots to myself as well. But it's always to the same email address. Is there anyway I can make a case for myself?
Thank for your help.
--
Out of my mind and out of control! |
|
GeekNJ
Premium
join:2000-09-23
Waldwick, NJ | Call OOL and discuss it with them. |
|
intocable7
A M A Z I N
Premium
join:2003-03-05
Bronx, NY
| reply to rustypixel
yea dude...i was capped for ...well its obvious why i was capped. but just give them a call and explain your situation..but make sure you get the right representative to help you out...there are so many of them that will say that you`re ok knowing your capped ...so state your case and hopefully you will be uncapped. |
|
the_mule
join:2002-12-28
| reply to Lex Luthor
said by GeekNJ :
It seems to be folks that upload an excessive amount over an extended period of time.
Sure, if by ‘excessive’ and ‘extended’ you mean that which gets you capped. Just how much is upload excessive you ask? That’s easy, its any upload that gets you capped; so what is an extended period of time? Again…it’s any period of time that gets you capped. Of course, this all may change according to time and place too.
Perhaps what another customer said Cablevision had told him might be appropriate to your situation Rustypixel:
said by George Moskowitz:
I am a telecommuter and occasionally (read 1-2x a week) do small (read 50-100megabyte) uploads of preconfigured packages for my customers.
I switched from Earthlink/Covad to Optimum Online as you all know how hyped OOL is. I can tell you all from a business perspective, it was the stupidest thing I've ever done.
The third day after the switch, while uploading at a snail's pace to a customer with a modem, I was capped.
After being capped a second time shortly thereafter I explained my situation to engineers who called to lift the cap.
Their reply was very simply: "Our network is not designed for sustained uploads. Sir you'll have to decide if Optimum Online is for you."
The second time I was steamed and explained what I needed to do and for how long. His best solution was to advise me to split all my uploads to 15 minute and take 5-10 minute breaks or use email.
Of course, 50-100 megabytes once or twice a week doesn’t sound all that excessive or extended to me but then we only have what other report as Cablevision refuses to spell out just what excessive or extended might be. |
|
batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ
clubs: | reply to Lex Luthor
After this most popular forum what do we know about not getting capped? Nothing absolute nothing, except do not up load any thing. |
|
rustypixel
Rustypixel
join:2001-03-23
Old Bridge, NJ
clubs:
|  reply to Lex Luthor
Thanks to all for their replies and suggestions. I placed a call to OOL and spoke to a couple of reps. and was told pretty much the same that the person whom the_mule quoted. I was told that their systems were not designed for sustained, heavy uploads and I would have to decide whether or not OOL was the right choice for me.
I'm sorry to keep asking what might seem like dumb questions here, but can someone explain to me what they mean by "The system wasn't designed..."? Are other service providers capping as well? I'm sure that somewhere in the million and one posts regarding this issue people have expressed their frustration... and I'm throwing mine in too; this is just annoying!
--
Out of my mind and out of control! |
|
GeekNJ
Premium
join:2000-09-23
Waldwick, NJ
| My take on your situation Rusty would be to see if it happens again, and then call back and try to politely escalate the situation to the next level.
I can't really understand how sending 10mb emails will ever get you capped unless you were sending hundreds right after each other.
Let us know how you make out.
--
Have you tweaked your OOL connection? |
|
TheWiseGuy
Dog And Butterfly
Premium,MVM
join:2002-07-04
Yonkers, NY
| reply to rustypixel
said by rustypixel :
I was told that their systems were not designed for sustained, heavy uploads and I would have to decide whether or not OOL was the right choice for me.
I'm sorry to keep asking what might seem like dumb questions here, but can someone explain to me what they mean by "The system wasn't designed..."? Are other service providers capping as well? I'm sure that somewhere in the million and one posts regarding this issue people have expressed their frustration... and I'm throwing mine in too; this is just annoying!
DOCSIS 1.0 calls for 2 upstream standards 16QAM and QPSK. Most cable companies use QPSK because it is less sensitive to noise problems on the upstream then 16QAM. 16QAM is 10mbps Upstream, QPSK is 5mbps upstream per channel. The amount of noise is very sensitive to the size of the area covered by the node. Most Cable providers including OOL use QPSK but it was mentioned that at some point OOL may move to 16QAM.
Most nodes pass 400-500 people and with a 25% subscription rate that means that OOL will have about 100-125 users per Upstream channel. The upstream channel is 5 mbps so if several people on the channel are constantly sending at 1mbps, you are going to run into intermittent lag which will effect all the gamer's on the channel. When you upload at 1mbps you use 20% of the Upstream channel capacity. The Upstream was designed to be used for short bursts. Because of the many to one relationship of the modems to the CMTS the Upstream is more difficult to effectively manage then the downstream.
The Upstream performance has a significant effect on the performance of the whole network. A slowdown on the Upstream will cause gamer's to have lag, and some slowdown in other user's downloads since ACKs must get out to allow the Download to continue. Saturation of the upstream, which can be done by 5 users, causes packet loss, and a Slowdown in Downloads to 1mbps or below, and surfing to slow to a crawl.
Most other cable providers have Upstream caps of 256kbps while most DSL providers have a Upstream cap of 128kbps. If you send 15 files of 15MB via E-mail with overhead this is the equivalent of about 300MB which would take 1.5 hours at 256kbps and 3 hours at 128kbps. Yet even some of the providers with lower caps have had problems and instituted limits.
»support.cox.net/custsup/safety/b···aq.shtml
quote:
What Are the Current Cox High Speed Internet Residential Bandwidth Limitations?
The Cox High Speed Internet acceptable use policy allows each user a maximum of 2GB per day and/or 30GB of downloads per month. Uploads are limited to 1GB per day and/or 7.5GB per month. This is an extremely high limit - for example 2GB of content is equivalent to about 60,000 pictures, 2000 minutes of MP3 music or 3 to 4 full-length movies.
»www.cabledatacomnews.com/oct02/oct02-2.html
said by Cable Datacom news::
Among the handful of biggest MSOs, only Time Warner stands out in its near-term resistance to the idea of service tiers and bandwidth consumption charges. "It's not an active topic right now," said a Time Warner spokesperson, arguing that consumption billing particularly doesn't make any business sense to the company. "[The problem is] very sporadic and erratic. It's not common."
But even Time Warner acknowledges that heavy bandwidth use by a low number of subscribers can be a real hassle. Several months ago in Texas, the spokesperson said, the company "had to throttle down" bandwidth for several very active nodes because of traffic backups those users were creating for the entire broadband network. "We'll limit the ability of anybody doing massive uploads,"
--
Dog and Butterfly
[text was edited by author 2003-09-03 09:00:01] |
|
jaa
Premium,MVM
join:2000-06-13
 ·Optimum Online
 ·Vonage
| reply to rustypixel
Rusty - I'd suggest just keep doing what you are doing. Don't worry about the cap.
Since your upload is email (mostly to yourself), it really doesn't matter how long it takes. It is unlikely you are going to send the email, drive to work, and get there before the email does, even uploading at the capped 150kbps (which is faster than many $50/mo DSL services).
OOL limits emails to 20mb, so if you have large files emailing won't work (unless you use a non-OOL SMTP server). A couple of alternatives that may work for you are putting the files on a laptop, or burning a CD.
--
NOTHING justifies terrorism. We don't negotiate with terrorists. Those that support terrorists are terrorists. |
|
the_mule
join:2002-12-28
| reply to TheWiseGuy
said by TheWiseGuy :
Yet even some of the providers with lower caps have had problems and instituted limits.
And yet no other provider I know of goes about caps or limits the way Cablevision does. So let’s assume that the systems all these broadband cable providers use are fairly similar, why then does Cablevision choose to offer a different flavor of service than all the rest? In a word, marketing. Why sell a 1.5/256 with the rest of the pack when you can sell a 10/1 service—it’s the difference between selling actual bandwidth and hyping the promise of ‘stoopid fast’ Internet access, really.
All Cablevision has done is found a way to exploit the very shared nature of the cable network that leaves their customers with bragging rights to the fastest Internet access for the home and very little else. Which was all fine and well say before they decided upon the ridiculous policy of punitive caps without explanation. So while I can understand Cablevision’s reasoning behind it, the very idea that they would then sacrifice other customers in my name just doesn’t sit all that well with me. Therefore, Cox’s bandwidth policies no longer scare me and the idea of a tiered service just keeps sounding better all the time.
said by Time Warner:
We'll limit the ability of anybody doing massive uploads,
Right, and while your at it you might want to define just what massive uploads are which is exactly what Cox cable does and what Cablevision does not. Cablevision likes their cake and wants to eat it too, paid for by its customers of course. |
|
Lex Luthor
Premium,Mod
join:2000-09-17
Hicksville, NY
Host:
OptimumOnline
Users Find Hot Deals
Users find Hot Dea..
Requests for Hot D..
| said by the_mule :
Why sell a 1.5/256 with the rest of the pack when you can sell a 10/1 service—it’s the difference between selling actual bandwidth and hyping the promise of ‘stoopid fast’ Internet access, really.
So then you'd rather cap everyone at 1.5M/256k and allow you to upload/download 24/7? Did you ever answer me in the other thread when I laid out some proposed alternatives? I don't recall if you responded to that or not. I'm curious what your preferable solution would be, if you assume for now that CV spending more $s is not a solution.
I think CV would probably satisfy most of the people who are unhappy about the cap if they did 2 things.
1) Outline what most likely will get you capped.
2) Notify people they have been capped.
Would either of those things really make a difference either way? I don't really go crazy not knowing what I'll get capped for. If I get capped, they'll uncap me if I ask nicely. Same thing with the notification really. I guess they could notify you, but doesn't make me so upset that they don't.
I doubt if they did either of these two things that we'd see any fewer complaints about the cap policy.
Personally, I love the fact that I can burst to 8Mbps down and 1Mbps up for the times I need it.
I don't know why so many people seem to think that you can't use 1Mbps upload. Sure you can, just not for "hours" on end.
[text was edited by author 2003-09-03 15:42:31] |
|
TheWiseGuy
Dog And Butterfly
Premium,MVM
join:2002-07-04
Yonkers, NY
| reply to the_mule
Well for 95-98% of the customers the 1mbps Upstream provides a better experience and the 1mbps cap does not cause problems because these users actually send for a shorter time period then if they had a lower cap. For the small percentage of users that do massive Uploads, (remember what would be considered massive at 256kbps say 200-400MB which take 2-4 hours, takes 1/2 to 1hour with OOL) OOL has the choice of allowing these users to either cause congestion or lose money adding expensive Hardware for these users, or capping the users. There is no way from a financial basis OOL can justify adding expensive hardware. For OOL and for the majority of users capping subscribers makes more sense then allowing congestion to effect the other subscribers.
The TOS makes it quite clear they can limit your Bandwidth at their sole discretion. Again if you don't like the TOS you have the right to not get the service. A provider of a service always has a right to set the rules of use for that service and you always have the right to not get the service. If you don't like a service a company supplies then you should get a different service. For the vast majority of users the present service is better then if they lower the cap and Cablevision has the right to offer these users a better experience while not losing money on users who send large amounts of data.
--
Dog and Butterfly |
|
the_mule
join:2002-12-28
| reply to Lex Luthor
said by Lex Luthor :
Did you ever answer me in the other thread when I laid out some proposed alternatives? I don't recall if you responded to that or not. I'm curious what your preferable solution would be, if you assume for now that CV spending more $s is not a solution.
Well OK, as long as you a just curious about what I think preferable solution might be and not putting the question to me like a prosecutor of old engaged in a case of witchery. But no, I really don’t remember answering you if for no other reason that you don’t exactly say what the question was. Unless of course you meant the previous question, which I can answer easily enough…
said by Lex Luthor :
So then you'd rather cap everyone at 1.5M/256k and allow you to upload/download 24/7?
Sure—why not? It is after all, the very alternative most other cable broadband providers use.
Of course, I’d just assume that Cablevision just at a minimum implement those very alternatives that you yourself propose:
1. Outline what most likely will get you capped.
2. Notify people they have been capped.
said by Lex Luthor :
Would either of those things really make a difference either way? I don't really go crazy not knowing what I'll get capped for. If I get capped, they'll uncap me if I ask nicely. Same thing with the notification really. I guess they could notify you, but doesn't make me so upset that they don't.
I doubt if they did either of these two things that we'd see any fewer complaints about the cap policy.
You say that as if the only reason these policies might be implemented would be to create fewer complaints here (By all means, please correct me if I’m wrong)? I on the other hand, could really care less how much this policy change might affect the volume of ‘complaints’. What I am more interested in is a policy spells out to consumers just what it is they are paying for and makes it easier (not harder) for those same consumers to make educated choices and to differentiate between different broadband providers and makes it easier for those consumers to use the very Internet connection they pay for in accordance to the very polices outlined in the Terms of Service.
So you have no problem with Cablevision’s policy of not informing customers they have been capped. Why—because it might mean more bandwidth for you during those times that you love to burst to 8Mbps down and 1Mbps up? I’m curious as to who the real ‘web hogs’ are here. |
|
TheWiseGuy
Dog And Butterfly
Premium,MVM
join:2002-07-04
Yonkers, NY
| said by the_mule :
So you have no problem with Cablevision’s policy of not informing customers they have been capped. Why—because it might mean more bandwidth for you during those times that you love to burst to 8Mbps down and 1Mbps up?
Correct, most customers like the ability to send things "stoopid fast". In fact the commercial never says send large amounts of data, it says send it fast. The caps are designed to allow users to send a normal amount of data very fast. The higher caps give most users a better experience. If you need to send extremely large amounts of data you should get a T1, because a $45-50 connection is not designed to send extremely large amounts of data.
--
Dog and Butterfly |
|
