Qwest FTTN Upgrades Causing Problems For CLECsBaby bell using interference to upsell CLEC customers? ( old news - 01:48PM Sunday Dec 14 2008) tags: competition · business · alternatives · telco · install · clec · Qwest · Qwest.netQwest's in the process of spending roughly $300 million to upgrade 1.8 million of their customers to ADSL2+ technology, offering users 12Mbps/896kbps tiers for slightly less than $50, and 20Mbps/896kbps tiers for around $100. Those are introductory rates, change depending on whether you bundle local phone, and those prices increase after a year -- though can be locked down with a long term contract. Qwest hopes to see a FTTN penetration rate of 40% by 2010, with upgrades costing the company around $175 per home. But as Qwest deploys the new service, we're seeing a growing amount of grumbling from CLECs and customers in our Qwest forum about Qwest using the opportunity to kill off competing carriers. In several instances, technicians for competing CLECs say the new FTTN infrastructure is creating interference for customers on traditional DSL (be it Qwest's or a competitor's). Several techs are claiming that Qwest then uses the technical difficulties (confirmed in Qwest documentation -- .doc file) to upsell customers to ADSL2+ instead of fixing the problem. An excerpt of a post from one CLEC technician in Utah: Qwest techs that are presented with a troubleshooting issue on a line that now qualifies for ADSL2+ are encouraged to blame the issue on that crosstalk and propose an migration to the new Qwest-only service as solution. That's not my imagination, our Qwest representative, who comes to major account operations from the DSL division, has told us this is the new procedure. And we see it every single day. It can be difficult to determine what is actually a byproduct of spectral interference and what is just marketing. We've been told by engineers that the true volume of legitimately effected lines is minimal, but that doesn't change the fact that we are losing users by the dozens because of it. Says another in Denver: I can confirm that this is a huge issue in the Denver area. If there is a FTTN circuit in the same count as a ADSL circuit, it will either kill the ADSL circuit completely, or destroy the speeds. Qwest techs are being told to cut any problem circuits to FTTN. If you are a CLEC, you have no choice but to cut the circuit, and use Qwest as an ISP. And from another technician, from yet another ISP in Utah: We are hemorrhaging DSL subscribers in the Salt Lake Valley over this interference, and also over the fact that Qwest agents are instructed to use any repair call as an upsale for FTTN. Given that Qwest isn't sharing the FTTN infrastructure with CLECs, the upgrades are a good opportunity for the ILEC to kill off pesky competitors once and for all. Unfortunately, customers are getting caught in the middle, some claiming they've been told they can keep their independent ISP and upgrade to FTTN. I've fired off a number of inquires to Qwest about the claims being made by CLEC techs, and hope to have more on this later this week.
Related:- Product Spotlight: magicJack VoIP Service
- Qwest Finally Killing Off Old 'Choice TV'
- Qwest Looking Ripe For Acquisition
- U-Verse Launching In Birmingham Tomorrow?
- ISPs Shouldn't Pretend To Be Content Companies
- Qwest Launches Rebranding Effort
- Qwest Keeps Pretending Speed Doesn't Matter
- Verizon: Cut Your Landline To Save Money
|
 
Pz_
join:2001-03-31
Brownsburg, IN
clubs:
| some things never change Good to see that this is all still the same. These were the exact same tactics deployed to our customers some 10 years ago way back when I installed DSL. Only then it was Ameritech sticking it to us with "line problems" then having them magically disappear when they cut the CLEC out of the equation. | |
|  | 
NOCMan
Verizon Fios User
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Flower Mound, TX
| Re: some things never change Was not enough for them to kill us mom and pop isp's off back in the 90's by charging us the same rate for a DSL line as they charged a customer. Now they've got government permission to migrate customers to FTTN and deny us access to our customers if they switch.
This should be illegal. Crap like this is why so many are unserved/underserved. | |
| | | 
LiamJunket
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Ocean City, NJ
 ·Comcast
4 edits |  Here is a Qwest DOC explaining the interference problem ...
»www.qwest.com/wholesale/download···3_08.doc
Issue Description: Service InterferenceCertain Qwest network upgrades or changes may impact end user’s existing Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM)-based Qwest Commercial Broadband Service functionality that is provisioned on a stand-alone basis or with either Resale voice service or Qwest Local Services Platform® (QLSP®) voice service. The occurrence of this Digital Subscriber Line (“DSL”) interference happens only when certain network conditions occur, including at some Central Office or Remote Terminal (“CO/RT”) overlay sites where there is a power disparity between the distant CO streams and the RT data streams in shared binder groups. The RT DSL can degrade the CO DSL if in the same binder group.
Remote Terminal (RT) deployment of Internet Protocol (IP) broadband or also referred to as Fiber-to-the-Node (FTTN) where the serving Central Office has ATM-based DSL are overlay areas and may cause interference or degradation of the ATM-based DSL service in some cases.-------------
Description of SolutionUpon receipt of a repair ticket for broadband interference, Qwest will endeavor to address or correct the service interference as detailed below and may result in moving the existing DSL connection to a new binder group at the CO/RT.
In certain instances, Qwest may determine that the existing DSL network configuration providing the broadband service to the end user location is no longer compatible with the new network configuration. Resulting service interference cannot be corrected without a broadband service change.If Qwest determines that a broadband service change can correct the interference issue, you may submit, and Qwest will accept, a service request (for speeds of 1.5Mbs or greater) to change the existing broadband service to an IP broadband) based Qwest Broadband option detailed below. Note: these options are otherwise not available under Qwest Commercial Broadband Service and repair ticket number must be provided.. • ATM broadband speeds of 1.5Mbs or greater can be changed to same IP broadband speed. • ATM broadband speeds of 1.5Mbs or greater can be upgraded to a higher IP broadband speed, new rates will apply to the upgraded speed including Internet access. • ATM broadband speeds less than 1.5Mbs can be changed, but must be changed to an IP broadband speed of 1.5Mbs, new rates will apply to the new speed. ---------
Internet AccessIf it is necessary to make a change to IP-based DSL service, Qwest will provide Internet access. Qwest will waive the charge for Qwest Internet Basic Internet access service when the speed is 1.5Mbps or the same speed as the former ATM-based DSL. In some Qwest states this wavier of the Qwest Internet Basic may be reflected as $.01 on your bill. Call the Tech Support Center at 888-777-9569 to obtain the newly assigned credentials. If service is changed to IP broadband service, it will be your duty to work with your end-user customer to ensure e-mail (web-based) and other application services you provide are still available. If the end-user moves to IP broadband services, static IP addresses are available only from Qwest. Ordering of static IP' addresses is available at » https:// www.qwest.net/account_tools/sign···t_tools/ within Account Manager tool. Static IP’s may be ordered only after broadband order is complete and cannot be ordered with an LSR. It is your responsibility to manage any request for static IP’s with your end user. Giving credential information to your end user may allow your end user to order these directly. These charges will be billed through the summary bill. ----------- In cases where an Interference issue has been identified by Qwest, Qwest procedures are to correct the interference issue as follows: • Identify the facilities where the interference exists. • Determine if the service interfered with is a C.O. Based DSLAM. • Determine if Qwest has installed a Remote DSLAM in the Network. • Determine if the Service being interfered with is in the same binder group as the interferer Service. • Move the interfered with service to a different binder group. The above process will be followed until binder group separation is no longer possible. At this point the CLEC will be given the opportunity to follow the process for an IP broadband alternative. | |
| | viperlmw
Premium
join:2005-01-25
 ·Qwest.net
| Re: Here is a Qwest DOC explaining the interference problem ... So there is a process for the CLEC to keep their customer. It seems to me that the CLECs need to educate their customers to initiate repair with their provider (the CLEC) and have the CLEC maintain control of the repair process. There is no need for a CLEC customer to ever call Qwest, but many CLECs don't want to deal with repair issues themselves, wanting to have the customer deal directly with the incumbent. If the CLEC keeps control of their customer, all will be well. | |
| | mrhuggles
join:2007-03-29
Ames, IA | what exactly is IP-based dsl and why isnt it effected? | |
| | |
LiamJunket
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Ocean City, NJ
·Comcast
| Re: Here is a Qwest DOC explaining the interference problem ... said by mrhuggles  :what exactly is IP-based dsl and why isnt it effected? My impression from reading that Doc is that that is what they are calling FTTN.
Remote Terminal (RT) deployment of Internet Protocol (IP) broadband or also referred to as Fiber-to-the-Node (FTTN) where the serving Central Office has ATM-based DSL are overlay areas and may cause interference or degradation of the ATM-based DSL service in some cases.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? | |
| | | | 
knotpc
@wispertel.net
| Re: Here is a Qwest DOC explaining the interference problem ...
As ADSL travels from the CO on an F1 (feeder pair) it eventually connects to an F2 (distribution pair). The connection is made using a copper pair jumper in a "Crossbox". The F2 is what eventually goes down your street and connects to a drop wire that connects to an SNI (station network interface) located on or in your home or business.
In the world of FTTN the IPDSLAM is placed beside the Crossbox. An ADSL2+ circuit is connected via jumpers directly to your F2, the pair that physically feeds your home. F2 feed cables can be quite large however, as they go through your neighborhood they begin to shrink, generally speaking the F2 going down your backyard or alley is likely to be 25 to 50 pairs, telephone plant is grouped into 25 pair complement. For FTTN to work and provide ROI to Qwest the IPDSLAM must be placed within ~2500 feet of your home. ADSL2+ achieves high download transfer rates on short loops after 2500 feet it begins to act like its elder sister ADSL.
Now back to the POWER interference issue. ADSL begins losing power as soon as it leaves the DSLAM in the CO on the F1 pair. By the time the ADSL circuit reaches the Crossbox and is connected to the F2 it might very well be on its last leg, having little power left to mitigate the effects of a nearby ADSL2+ circuits. The ADSL2+ circuit that is connected at the same Crossbox leaves at FULL power able to destroy its older sibling.
Qwest also mentions binder separation which is a technical joke. To have appropriate separation between TWO ADSL and ADSL2+ circuits with differing POWER LEVELS as described above, the F2 feeder cable would need to be at least 100 pairs (four 25 pair compliments). With the single ADSL circuit in the first 25 pair bundle and the ADSL2+ circuit located in either two of the last 25 pair bundles. The reason this is a joke is that telephone plant was designed to offer 1.5 copper pair lines to each home. A normal block has a single 25 pair to 50 pair feed, which provides no way to separate a single ADSL circuit from a single ADSL2+ circuit.
If you notice I keep referring to SINGLE ADSL and SINGLE ADSL2+ circuits. This is intentional as it is far more likely that the F2 going through your neighborhood carries more than ONE single ADSL or ADSL2+circuit. One ADSL2+ circuit installed on a F2 pair, as described, would cause POWER interference issues on ALL ADSL circuits located within 75 pairs of it. Again, the issue is POWER. The ADSL2+ circuit is simply overpowering the ADSL circuit.
To alleviate the issue Qwest could simply adjust the power output of the IPDSLAM. Which would make the FTTN project fail as the ADSL2+ circuits would not be able to deliver the desired download speeds with reduced power.
So this is not a marketing issue it is a POWER issue. If the CLECS want to survive they will need to fight for interconnect rights to the FTTN network, which in my opinion is a losing legal battle. | |
| | | 
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
·Optimum Online
| said by mrhuggles :what exactly is IP-based dsl and why isnt it effected? A full resale-only deal rather than the ISP providing the backhaul. | |
| TheMG
join:2007-09-04
Edmonton, AB
1 edit | Upload speed. 20Mbps/896kbps
Wow, and I thought Shaw Cable was bad with their Nitro 25Mbps/1Mbps for $93...
Look I know ADSL2+ is limited in terms of the maximum upload speed, but it can handle faster than 896kbps. | |
| | 
tubbynet
reminds me of the danse russe
Premium
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ | Re: Upload speed. not when you max out the interleaving at the top end of the spec for each sub. nothing but trying to maximize the customer base on the lowest possible amount.
q. | |
| dustman81
join:2002-05-28
Stow, OH
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·RoadRunner Cable
| A swing and a miss for Qwest It's good that Qwest is starting to deploy FTTN, like AT&T is doing, but using ADSL2+ instead of VDSL is stupid.
At least AT&T did that right. So they can offer their users video, phone and high speed internet instead of just internet. Not only that, but AT&T's internet is cheaper, too. AT&T users can get 18Mbps/1.5Mbps for $65/mth. When AT&T starts deploying VDSL2+ and pair bonding, it's going to smoke whatever Qwest has.
It would have been nice for AT&T to have FTTH like Verizon FiOS, but it's still better than Qwest.
I don't what exec though that ADSL2+ was the way to go, but they are going to get beat by the cable companies, Verizon and AT&T. | |
| | | 
a333
A hot cup of integrals please
join:2007-06-12
Corona, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Dumb CLECs hmmm..... maybe bacause there are pesky roadblocks like ROW limitations and trenching costs involved, not to mention, Quest will do its utmost best to legally bar the CLEC's from putting so much as a toe into the FTTx market. Don't believe me, look what they did to projects like Utopia (hence the reason I hate gov't-funded networks even more, they're susceptible to the sleeping arrangements of politicians....). | |
| | | RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
·XMission
| Re: Dumb CLECs said by a333 : look what they did to projects like Utopia (hence the reason I hate gov't-funded networks even more, they're susceptible to the sleeping arrangements of politicians....). I would think you would hate "private" more than "government" since the "private is so dishonest. At least with the "government" we have a chance to vote out the crooks, with "private" we just pay more.
Also, There are different levels of "government" each level up is less responsive to the needs of the people.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. | |
| | | |
a333
A hot cup of integrals please
join:2007-06-12
Corona, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Dumb CLECs Vote out the crooks for what? More crooks?? Hehe, good one...the day a crook is EFFECTIVELY replaced is the day pigs will fly, and hell freezes over. I.E. to call a politician honest is to call a whore a virgin...
Responsive or not, I personally view ALL levels of government as being composed of nothing more than a group of political opportunists. | |
| | | | | RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
·XMission
| Re: Dumb CLECs said by a333 :Vote out the crooks for what? More crooks?? Hehe, good one...the day a crook is EFFECTIVELY replaced is the day pigs will fly, and hell freezes over. I.E. to call a politician honest is to call a whore a virgin... Responsive or not, I personally view ALL levels of government as being composed of nothing more than a group of political opportunists. Sure glad I do not live in your city, nothing but crooks to choose from. I guess I have gotten spoiled living in a more honest area (well at least until you get to the state level). But I do hear of (and know of one) cities like yours nearby.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. | |
| | | | | |
a333
A hot cup of integrals please
join:2007-06-12
Corona, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
1 edit | Re: Dumb CLECs Oh, you can keep trying to be naive. Pretty much ANY politician these days, be they city, state, or national, have SOME kind of political agenda. Not to mention, politics is a pretty expensive business. Who's going to pay for all those events, rallies, and TV/phone ad campaigns? Surely not the meager salary that comes with election, eh?
It's not the politicians' default character that makes them crooks per se (in most cases at least). It's just the way the game is played that ends up making politicians bend down in some way or the other to special interests, generally due to "campaign contributions" made by such groups. Based on this, I for one can't fool myself into EVER believing that a politician actually cares for their constituents, and actually believes in the issues most of their constituents believe in. Sorry, I am just not that naive or gullible.
As to the "nothing but crooks to choose from", I remain in support of my statement. As I've explained, a politician WILL at some point have to bend down to special interests, whether it be voluntarily or not. Thus, it stands that (at least in the eyes of the average Joe), politicians are all crooks.
Example:
Politician "A" could have made fiery speeches on "change" and "bringing the troops back" during his/her campaign. They may very well be elected because of such (empty) promises. Then, once the time comes to actually implement all the fiery talk, politician A gets nowhere (cutting back troops? Where'll all those megamillion military contracts with Boeing/General Dynamics going to go?), and the cycle of despair begins once again, feeding a new round of politicians who take advantage of A's lack of achievements to win office and start the mentioned cycle again. "A" meanwhile sees that it's just easier to cooperate with special interests and promote their goals quietly, and simply pretend that the democracy exists when it's effectively an oligarchy.
So, where does the average Joe (who's completely out of the above need-to-know loop) stand? They feel betrayed, as do their fellow citizens, and they vote for the next "maverick" aka whoever can make the most fiery speeches and empty promises next elections, and they keep this "ball of oligarchy" rolling. If you think this ONLY happens at the national level, you are sorely misguided and have no idea of what's going on in gov'ts in ALL levels. The example I gave may involve only national policy, but the idea stays much the same if you take a long and hard look at state and local politics.
EDIT:
And attempting to extrapolate your city's politics to that of larger and more bureaucratic cities like New York, Washington, and numerous others isn't exactly the most astute analysis one would expect from any informed citizen in these times....maybe my expectations for intelligent discussion are just a bit too high..... | |
| | | | | | | RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
·XMission
| Re: Dumb CLECs said by a333 : About what I would expect from NY and the politicians I have seen that claim that as home. Oh well, you can believe what you want, but there are places that have local government for the people (not all the people, that is impossible, there are always someone who does not like what is going on).
And on your edit, I do not extrapolate my smaller town to your larger one, I know the bigger the pie, the less honest a politician will probably be. Someday when you grow up and get out into the rest of the world then you might learn that not every place is like where you are now.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. | |
| | | | | | | |
a333
A hot cup of integrals please
join:2007-06-12
Corona, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
2 edits | Re: Dumb CLECs And someday when you poke your head out of your seeming Utopia you claim to live in you'll figure out that corrupt politicians exist in pretty much every level everywhere, probably even in your own town/city.
And your comment about New York just serves to show your ignorance and utter lack of education. Oh well, now I know what I should've expected from you.
You can try all you want to put down NY but you haven't answered a single point I made in my post.
And please, I've traveled plenty, and actually OUTSIDE the good ol' US, so I KNOW what it's like around this thing we call the world.
Maybe something other a vacuous rant or mere personal attacks would actually help further your point. I don't know who you're trying to impress with these attempted insults (which by the way is not exactly improving my already bad impression of your state either), but you sure as hell aren't impressing me...
Try again... | |
| | | | | | | | | RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs: | Re: Dumb CLECs I use to live in NY. | |
| | | | | | | | | |
a333
A hot cup of integrals please
join:2007-06-12
Corona, NY | Re: Dumb CLECs So, you "use" to live in NY... and I LIVE and HAVE LIVED in NY. What's your point? | |
| | | | | | | | | | RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
·XMission
| Re: Dumb CLECs said by a333 :So, you "use" to live in NY... and I LIVE and HAVE LIVED in NY. What's your point? You accused me of never having been anywhere other than this area here which, compared to places I have lived in like NY, has a relatively honest local government in most areas.
I just pointed out to you that I do have experience living in other states. Including the one you seem to think is so bad (and I agreed with you), and thus to you, every other place is the same.
Some day when you get older and if you get the right job, you might have the experience of living in other areas and seeing the diversity that is America.
In the mean time, enjoy your narrow view point, America is NOT just like N.Y. or Calif., despite what some folks like to think.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. | |
| | | | | | | | | |
a333
A hot cup of integrals please
join:2007-06-12
Corona, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
2 edits | Re: Dumb CLECs said by RayW :In the mean time, enjoy your narrow view point, America is NOT just like N.Y. or Calif., despite what some folks like to think. Yup, and neither is it the Utopia you're making it out to be... so I don't know who has the narrower viewpoint here, but it sure as hell isn't me...
EDIT: You say you have experience living in other states. I on the other hand, have experience living in other COUNTRIES. Take your pick on the wider viewpoint.
Happy Holidays btw,
a333 | |
| | | | 
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| said by RayW :I would think you would hate "private" more than "government" since the "private is so dishonest. At least with the "government" we have a chance to vote out the crooks, with "private" we just pay more. That's silly. Government is the only true monopoly. Even with the worst of private companies, if you hate their service you can simply not pay them and not use their service and not be paying for something you don't like or can't use.
If you don't like your government, what can you do? Nothing.
said by RayW :Also, There are different levels of "government" each level up is less responsive to the needs of the people. The only thing that they are more responsive to is how much tax i can pay. I always vote for the candidate who promises to lower my taxes and they go up anyway. How's that for responsiveness?
--
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty | |
| | battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000
| "Why haven't they built their own network by now?"
Because the ILecs try and make that is difficult as possible. You have to follow certain rules to attach to their poles and even when you are going to go with their rules they do anything possible to delay you. They know CLecs can't just start planting poles because they will back opposition to the additional poles and franchise requests. They also know how up set people get over Vrad placement. In my city alone I can think of about 15 to 20 active CLecs off the top of my head. Could you imagine how many vrad type boxes there would be and how upset people would be about that. | |
| | | hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Toledo, OH
·buckeye cable
| Re: Dumb CLECs who says they can't use wireless? and in many areas the Power company owns the poles not the telco.
And for the other poster a Muni is not a CLEC. And they could have built out they just didnt. and now in many states, the state regulates the ROW and not the local areas. and why not go to the state and ask to pop up your own poles or put your line underground? | |
| | | | battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000
| Re: Dumb CLECs More and more Power companies are Clecs. In our area our Power Company is a Clec and it isn't very cooperative with the other CLecs either. Oh and it's also owned by the city government to boot. Wireless can be another problem because it's rather difficult to deploy new tower sites because people are afraid their eyes will fall out if they have too look at another tower.
A lot of people around here like to bitch about the lack of choice but they also like to bitch about the infrastructure that is needed to give them choice. | |
| | | | | hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Toledo, OH
·buckeye cable
1 edit | Re: Dumb CLECs You don't need a super large tower to offer wireless a small 200ft tower is usually fine. But in Ohio the major power company is a CLEC too they offer dial-up though in most of the area but using their CLEC brand- First Communications owned by First Energy. but AEP doesnt care to be a CLEC.
But also in Ohio we have a statewide ROW agreement. Which could be used to enter in the market. Especially if video was going to be offered.
Also in this area the cable company owns a great deal of their own poles. Power and Phone are on one side of the street and cable is on the other. | |
| | | | | | battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000 | Re: Dumb CLECs In Chattanooga, TN people protest towers even if they live miles away. This is from the same city that recently solved every problem they have. They now have their sights set on LED signs and their brightness. | |
| | | | | | | gigante
join:2000-06-30
Spring, TX
| Re: Dumb CLECs said by battleop : They now have their sights set on LED signs and their brightness. Oh My Goodness - i HATE those bright LED signs!!! | |
| | Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | im sure the ILECs would do anything and everything to "C-Block" a CLEC from getting full rights to the poles.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
| | qworster
join:2001-11-25
Los Angeles, CA
·Brand X Internet
·RoadRunner Cable
 ·Vonage
·DSL EXTREME
1 edit | said by pnh102 :Why haven't they built their own network by now? Qwest finally gets the message and starts investing in fiber. We should be applauding this! Why is there so much sympathy for yet another company that didn't get the memo to start building its own network? Because in most cases the poles are filled past safe capacity!
The power companies got there first, then the telcos and finally the cablecos. There hasn't been any capacity on the phone poles in most cities since the late 1970s-LONG BEFORE the WWW was a glimmer in anyone's thoughts. | |
| JesseHarris
join:2008-07-30
Sandy, UT | Old news XMission has known about this problem for a solid 6 months or more. That's why they're so heavily invested in UTOPIA right now. If they don't get away from Qwest's transport, they'll wither and die. | |
| danawest
join:2005-01-29
80241-2357
| 20mb speed price decrease The price for Qwest's Quantum speed (20mb down/1mb up) was just lowered $40 to $64.99/month. I believe your ISP has to be Microsoft/MSN or Qwest.net and it's an everyday price. Customers with that speed will see an automatic price drop on their next bill.
»www.qwest.com/residential/intern···landing/ | |
| | | | | Turbocpe
Premium
join:2001-12-22
IA
·Iowa Network Servi..
| Re: 20mb speed price decrease said by jadebangle :said by danawest :The price for Qwest's Quantum speed (20mb down/1mb up) was just lowered $40 to $64.99/month. I believe your ISP has to be Microsoft/MSN or Qwest.net and it's an everyday price. Customers with that speed will see an automatic price drop on their next bill. » www.qwest.com/residential/intern···landing/ major ripoff terrible upload speed for that price! i prefer fios  Well that's a no brainer. Problem is Qwest is not, or have not, been as well off as others like Verizon. In addition, Qwest has a lot of rural territory when compared to others. | |
| | |
InQwestTerritory
@QWEST.NET | Re: The bottom line is this: Hey DUDE, your in LA. Not even Qwest turf. | |
| | | qworster
join:2001-11-25
Los Angeles, CA | Re: The bottom line is this: said by InQwestTerritory :
Hey DUDE, your in LA. Not even Qwest turf.
But I used to live in Tucson... | |
| pabster
join:2001-12-09
Waterloo, IA | Hey, desperate times call for desperate measures. Of course Qwest is trying to push out the competition. It's the nature of any business, particularly a monopoly like the bells are. | |
| | netjedi
join:2002-08-01
Gillette, WY
| If you are a reseller of Qwest ATM DSL... Resellers of ATM DSL with Qwest will see this terminology:
Service Interference These network changes, including deployment of Remote-Based DSL may interfere with or degrade CLEC’s End User Customer’s existing ATM-based Service. Upon receipt of a trouble report involving interference with or degradation of Service to any of CLEC’s End User Customers, Qwest will attempt to correct the reported trouble by moving the Service to a new binder group, if available. If moving the Service to a new binder group does not correct the reported trouble, Qwest may determine that the existing ATM-based Service is no longer compatible with Remote-Based DSL and Qwest may immediately, and at its sole discretion, withdraw the Service on an individual circuit basis. Qwest will incur no liability to CLEC for degradation or withdrawal of Service caused by network changes, including deployment of Remote-Based DSL. | |
| | | |
|
|
Dumb CLECs
......No wait where have I heard this before?