Just of the phone with netsorce

sutty

Ok, I am just after getting off the phone with netsource and they confirmed that I have been put on the higher contention. I asked to be removed from it as I did not think I used it that much (the say I downloaded 1.3Gig a day). ok so then I was told that each week they will re do this. Now I can only download at 6KB's or less so I would say I've been doing maybe 100Megs a day. So does that mean I will be taken off this now??? I mean come on. Jsut put a cap on the service that will stop people downloading so much. But FFS, dont go changing the product and not telling anyone. I mean I am still paying my money for the ability to download at 50KB's +


So what the hell am I paying for? I think anyone on this higher contention ratio should be paying less for the time they spend on it. Wather or not they have a T&C. As far as I am concerned that was for a SOHO product of 512/128 not 48/128 (kind of a differance there) oh and I still do get the 128 upload's. Why is that?

query

eh, you have a contract for a RATE ADAPTIVE product UP TO 512 and UP TO 128

Dr_Teeth

That 'rate adaptive' stuff has to do with the max amount of bandwidth possible based on the quality of the line and distance from the exchange iirc. It has nothing to do with your ISP.

Teeth.

MrPinK

Originally posted by sutty
I asked to be removed from it as I did not think I used it that much (the say I downloaded 1.3Gig a day). ok so then I was told that each week they will re do this. Now I can only download at 6KB's or less so I would say I've been doing maybe 100Megs a day. So does that mean I will be taken off this now???

If you're getting 100 megs a day then you're downloading for about 5 hours a day. Not the best thing to do if you're trying to convince them you're not a heavy downloader.

Tazzle

100megs??? You should be fúcking ashamed of yourself! :rolleyes: Only in Ireland.

DaithiSurfer

cancel your direct debit and let them know you are only paying them the same percentage of the fee as the percentage of bandwidth you are getting.
it worked for me and i'm back to normal now.

pron

Um, unless I'm mistaken, you're on RADSL - yes ?

In that case what you're paying for - and people don't seem to realise this:

A line connection that *can* reach 512kbps down and 128kbps up
A contended service, at 48:1

This means that although your modem might say that you're connected at 512kbps (which you are) ... your throughput is not guaranteed to be above 512kbps/48 (assuming all 48 contended users are downloading fully .... they'll all get similar amounts)

This means you'll possibly only get about 10kbps - along with everyone else if you're doing any serious downloading - If that bothers you - get the ADSL package @ 24:1 where you'll probably get better downloads ... but you'll pay the price ... 512kbps is the maximum speed you can expect ... not the minimum you're paying for (that's 10kbps or so) !

Download rates of 6KB/s suggest you're not doing too badly yet ... still over 60kbps !

Smidders

Guys,

Netsource throttling people is all about them downloading huge amounts of data right?? Am I right in guessing that most of this would be over some kind of P2P software - Kazaa etc. Why can't they just put some kind of QOS routing on this type of traffic only? Throttle that kind of traffic back to 256k and leave the rest as it should be....

Is this a completely stupid suggestion, or does it have some merits? I seem to remember reading/hearing somewhere that some ISP's worldwide were already doing this type of thing.....


Smidders.

Praetorian

Pron, Netsources capping of the top downloaders has absolutely nothing to do with contention. If that was the case everybody would feel the pinch of contention slowing down downloads. I'm not capped, and I've never noticed a slow period for downloading.

Netsource are actually turning a little piece of software on, that limit's the connection for some people; ~20k/b per second downloads rather than ~50k/b per second.

pron

Praetorian,
I'm aware of the whole throttling thing, unfortunately people don't seem to get the fact that they are on a contended service, and they won't always get 50KB/s downlaods on a 512kbps RADSL line

<potential troll>
I personally wouldn't blame Netsource (and yes - I use them too) if they decided to enforce contention between the top 48 downloaders. Put them all on the one 512kbps circut and let them fight it out among themselves.

</potential troll>

Jokah

Can someone correct me If I am wrong please.

I just worked out that If you go with the basic Netsource package you are paying 66.55 euro a month then on top of that you have to pay Eircom the line rental of 22.5 euro a month.

Grand total 89.05 euro. What was Eircom's old price for DSL before the "reduction" 108 euro a month or something for a capped service.

Why then does the sticky on the broadband page exclude the line rental cost you have to pay to Eircom. Why doesnt it state the real price for the package?

Please correct me If I am wrong...

pron

XPThink,
All DSL products require you to have a functional telephone line ... for which you have to pay line-rental. That's regardless of whether you're using Netsource / Eircom / Esat / UTVIP or anyone else who chooses to supply the service.

Dr_Teeth

RADSL as a concept has nothing to do with contention either. All DSL lines are contended in some way at the exchange by the amount of bandwidth set aside for those lines from the exchange to Eircom's backbone where the other ISPs (like Netsource) connect to it.

If you want no contention you order a leased line, and even then you get a fuzzy sort of contention based on the amount of external bandwidth your ISP has vs the number of customers it has (unless they give you special QOS which you'll no-doubt pay through the nose for).

I'm aware of the whole throttling thing, unfortunately people don't seem to get the fact that they are on a contended service, and they won't always get 50KB/s downlaods on a 512kbps RADSL line

People are well aware they're on a contended service. However the DSLAM contention isn't the issue, it's extra layer on contention that Netsource have added to the bandwidth of the top 10% of downloaders that people are complaining about. Don't you 'get' that?

I personally wouldn't blame Netsource (and yes - I use them too) if they decided to enforce contention between the top 48 downloaders. Put them all on the one 512kbps circut and let them fight it out among themselves.

They've put the top 40 or so downloaders on one 2MB line iirc.

Teeth.

Jokah

Fair enough,

But im just wondering in the "Sticky" - Are they just showing the cost of packages being offered - Great sticky.....

Or should they include the price of line rental as well.

Just a thought...I knew about the line rental thing thanks to boards.....

Nice one......work is over.......:D

pron

Originally posted by Dr_Teeth

If you want no contention you order a leased line, and even then you get a fuzzy sort of contention based on the amount of external bandwidth your ISP has vs the number of customers it has (unless they give you special QOS which you'll no-doubt pay through the nose for).

I couldn't agree more !

People are well aware they're on a contended service. However the DSLAM contention isn't the issue, it's extra layer on contention that Netsource have added to the bandwidth of the top 10% of downloaders that people are complaining about. Don't you 'get' that?

They've put the top 40 or so downloaders on one 2MB line iirc.

This is the simple bit ... contention doesn't only happen on the DSLAM ... In the case of RADSL a "little bird" tells me that there is very little done to enforce contention on a DSLAM level, while Eircom supply the product to the ISPs on a 2meg circut for every 192 customers - which gives us the magic 48:1 / 512kbps contention numbers

This is where it's up to the ISP to enforce the contention at their end (and at their expense) ... so if they want to aggregate all the heavy downloaders into one virtual circut ... that's their choice ... they're doing exactly what it says on the tin.

SkepticOne

Originally posted by pron
This is where it's up to the ISP to enforce the contention at their end (and at their expense) ... so if they want to aggregate all the heavy downloaders into one virtual circut ... that's their choice ... they're doing exactly what it says on the tin.

And this virtual circuit, according to Netsource, has the lower contention ratio of 10:1. Per user, the heavy downloaders are being given extra bandwidth despite not paying any more than the light users.

carbsy

Originally posted by SkepticOne
And this virtual circuit, according to Netsource, has the lower contention ratio of 10:1. Per user, the heavy downloaders are being given extra bandwidth despite not paying any more than the light users.

You're missing the obvious Skept , this 10:1 is on top of the existing 48:1 at the exchange.

carb.

Dr_Teeth

Originally posted by pron
This is the simple bit ... contention doesn't only happen on the DSLAM ... In the case of RADSL a "little bird" tells me that there is very little done to enforce contention on a DSLAM level, while Eircom supply the product to the ISPs on a 2meg circut for every 192 customers - which gives us the magic 48:1 / 512kbps contention numbers

This is where it's up to the ISP to enforce the contention at their end (and at their expense) ... so if they want to aggregate all the heavy downloaders into one virtual circut ... that's their choice ... they're doing exactly what it says on the tin.

My point is, again, "RADSL" as a concept has nothing to do with contention. at all. Nothing about ones DSL bandwidth being capped by the ISP as well as the DSLAM was mentioned on the 'tin' describing Netsource's service.

Teeth.

The Brigadier

Originally posted by carbsy
You're missing the obvious Skept , this 10:1 is on top of the existing 48:1 at the exchange.

carb.

Netsource told me that the 10:1 was instead of the 48:1...

sutty

nope, the 10:1 is on top of the 48:1. They are doing this as they say that the 48:1 isn't working out. When they first started out they thought that everyone would be signing up for it. But it hasn't been the case. The 2megline is for 40 people who are "the heavy" downloaders. So there is *NO* way you can get near any of the bandwith that you are meant to be able to get. Yes it is rate adaptive service. But they are adding on extra contention to your already contened line. They really should not be alowed to do this with out informing the user of the product. I mean I am paing for a 48:1 contened 512/128 rate adaptive line. NOT a line that so far has only been able to get 6KB's. My main problem is that I am paing good money for a service. That I am not been given by Netsource.

NotImpressed

Pron, you wouldnt happen to be working for netsource would you

SkepticOne

Originally posted by sutty
nope, the 10:1 is on top of the 48:1. They are doing this as they say that the 48:1 isn't working out. When they first started out they thought that everyone would be signing up for it. But it hasn't been the case. The 2megline is for 40 people who are "the heavy" downloaders. So there is *NO* way you can get near any of the bandwith that you are meant to be able to get.

sutty, 40 512k users sharing a 2mb line is 10:1. That is how contention is defined.

For the purposes of contention, 40 512k users sharing 2 mb is equivalent to 10 512k users sharing a quarter of that, i.e., 512k. That is 10:1 contention.

Yes it is rate adaptive service. But they are adding on extra contention to your already contened line. They really should not be alowed to do this with out informing the user of the product. I mean I am paing for a 48:1 contened 512/128 rate adaptive line. NOT a line that so far has only been able to get 6KB's. My main problem is that I am paing good money for a service. That I am not been given by Netsource.

I agree that it has nothing to do with RADSL. It is about overall bandwidth usage.

The separate issue of RADSL means that you aren't guaranteed 512k even under ideal conditions, but this has nothing to do with contention.

BTW, I don't agree with the way Netsource went about establishing the heavy users pen, i.e., without warning.

pron

NotImpressed - No ... I don't work for netsource - on the other hand I do know enough about how DSL is provisioned - from having actually sat down and thought about entering the DSL sales market.

Dr_Teeth - You are right, the Rate Adaptive part of RADSL has *nothing* to do with contention - rather it's related to the copper between you and the exchange.

The RADSL service is provided by Eircom wholesale over an IP link ... with a 2Mbit pipe supplied for every 192 customers (giving the advertised 48:1 / 512kbps ratio). Contention at the exchange level is virtually non-existant at the moment ... most exchanges currently have virtually nil contention - although it is nominally per-exchange across all ISPs

As for what netsource are doing WRT throttling - I don't know - I do however believe that if they've put their top 10 downloaders onto one 512k path that those customers are *still* getting a better deal than they're paying for ...

Remember sutty 6KB/second is approx 5 times the minimum download speed possible (10kbps) - basic maths would suggest that you are contending a 512kbps pipe with 9 others who are constantly downloading!

Jonnie_Onion

As for what netsource are doing WRT throttling - I don't know - I do however believe that if they've put their top 10 downloaders onto one 512k path that those customers are *still* getting a better deal than they're paying for ...

Not at all. They have skewed the distribution of users to guranteee that they are getting a much worse deal for their money. How can 6kbs be a good deal for one's money?
A normal service would have a spread/distribution of light to heavy downloaders. That's how ADSL as a product is viable.

pron

Originally posted by Jonnie_Onion
Not at all. They have skewed the distribution of users to guranteee that they are getting a much worse deal for their money. How can 6kbs be a good deal for one's money?
A normal service would have a spread/distribution of light to heavy downloaders. That's how ADSL as a product is viable.

That's how DSL should be run ... perhaps ... but that expects contention to actualy happen on the exchange ...
The problem here is that 10 customers downloading full thwack will easily max out a 2Mbps line ... causing dropped packets (ping times / lag anyone ?) and generally degrading the service for everyone.

It makes sense to allocate a dedicated pipe for the high-downloaders ... let them contend with each other ... and allowing the normal users actually play their games / download their web-pages on a reasonable service. (Unfortunately it does have the side-effect of increasing the effective contention ratio to 182:3 (182 users on 1.5Mbps of the 2Mbps pipe .. the other 512kbps being reserved for the 10 heavies at 10:1). The 182 others will probably never notice the difference ... because none of them will be maxing their link enough to notice.

Remember the basic tenant of an ISP ... transit costs money. Profit comes from users who pay for transit they don't use (The Heinz Ketchup theory). This is why _any_ ISP will move their heavy users to contend with each other (or apply a cap on downloads, or both) ...

We'd all love 1Mbit SDSL with no contention at €10/month inc VAT. But let's be realistic here ... a _basic_ 512k leased line costs over a thousand Euro a month. If you _want_ that level of service - you'll have to pay for it !

Jonnie_Onion

All they had to do was implement a reasonable cap from the start.

pron

Originally posted by Jonnie_Onion
All they had to do was implement a reasonable cap from the start.

Yeah - unfortunately I'm guessing that Sales would have had a harder time selling a product that had effectively no margin, nor any major difference from Eircom's offering!

sutty

pron, That 6K I talked about is not a constant. Its the max speed I have gotten. Some downloads/webpages go into bytes. How can ANYONE say its ok to pay €66.55 inc vat for a service of a max 6KB/s. When what I am paying for is DSL (In other words Broad Band) you know that hole being able to download files and transfer data at faster rates!

sutty

Well I was just on to Netsource again. They are still tring to give me the speal that they gave me more bandwidth (Technicly they did. but there is no way on earth it can work out with the top 40 downloaders on the line) You cant battle for bandwidth when its not there. All they are doing is putting all the heavy downloads on a line to shut eveyone else up. They are brushing you under the carpit. I was then told I should just cancal my account if I wasn't happy....

So I did.


Netsource are GIMPS

bizmark

jesus their doing a fine job at destroying their public image arent they ?

so sutty what are you going to do now....i douth you will be happy to go back to 56k (oh the horror)

sutty

Well I'm going to take a look a prices now. Might fork out for a 1meg line. Will have to see who from though.... the only problem is getting the bloody web pages to load!

bizmark

the only problem is getting the bloody web pages to load!

be faster on 56k ***

why not get Esat business offering ?

sutty

be faster on 56k

You have no idea how true that is

pron

be faster on 56k

Not only that, on a fully-contended RADSL line you'd be faster on 14.4k !

It boils down to maths, and Sutty - you may have been the unfortunate one in the ten, who was getting over the "download the entire internet" phase. 10kbps is about 1KB/s ... so the numbers you've given are what can be expected if people do go mad on RADSL ... there's nothing Netsource or any other ISP can do to change that for you.

I only hope you were nice and polite to the people in Netsource ...

Jonnie_Onion

I'm upgrading to netsources SME line. It's not something I'm completely happy about, but it can be done straight away, and a cheaper price than moving to say eircom.

sutty

pron, Do you work for Netsource or what? I'm not the only one on the line in this house. There are 2 other lads using it (trying to anyway) You dont seam to realise that everything was fine for me up untill netsource put me on the extra contention. Now I cant even view webpages with out a VERY long wait. I was nice on the phone untill I got through to that tosser Michael what ever his name was.

Jonnie_Onion I was thinking about that as well but whats to stop them doing the samething?

eth0_

6k is totally not on. I get 4k on dial up ffs. Do they mention how long you are to be 'chastised' for sutty?

How is it that RADSL works fine in the UK but not here, eh? A friend of mine was an early adopter of BT's dsl in the north and I never remember him having problems like these. Then again, BT have invested more heavily in broadband in the uk, N Ireland already has 80% coverage broadband wise, moving to 100% in the next 2 years.

gurramok

Join the club sutty
56k is alot quicker than this gr8 dsl

I must ring them up again as i have a 360 euro bill outstanding since i got dsl.
They only billed me last month for 4 months dsl on my credit card, I wonder would they change their mind on performance if i'm a little angry

bizmark

How is it that RADSL works fine in the UK but not here, eh?

dont think thats fair T.B.H.......Eircom and Esat seem to be doing fine ....My esat radsl never drops below 50k d/l pings of 35ms

NS just basicly droped the ball they couldnt sell what they offered and their paying customers (High paying customers) are suffering

Jonnie_Onion

Originally posted by sutty
pron, Do you work for Netsource or what? I'm not the only one on the line in this house. There are 2 other lads using it (trying to anyway) You dont seam to realise that everything was fine for me up untill netsource put me on the extra contention. Now I cant even view webpages with out a VERY long wait. I was nice on the phone untill I got through to that tosser Michael what ever his name was.

Jonnie_Onion I was thinking about that as well but whats to stop them doing the samething?

Absolutely nothing.

Boston

Originally posted by eth0_
6k is totally not on. I get 4k on dial up ffs. Do they mention how long you are to be 'chastised' for sutty?

How is it that RADSL works fine in the UK but not here, eh? A friend of mine was an early adopter of BT's dsl in the north and I never remember him having problems like these. Then again, BT have invested more heavily in broadband in the uk, N Ireland already has 80% coverage broadband wise, moving to 100% in the next 2 years.

in the UK they used RADSL purely as a means to serve more people, even then at certain distances speed is not up to the mark. Here they used it to bang more people on while suppling the same bandwidth. so instead of 24:1 contention you got 48:1

pron

Originally posted by sutty
pron, Do you work for Netsource or what? I'm not the only one on the line in this house. There are 2 other lads using it (trying to anyway) You dont seam to realise that everything was fine for me up untill netsource put me on the extra contention.

Asked and answered Sutty - I don't work for netsource ... I have however looked into selling RADSL based products myself and done the maths (and no - unless you've already got bandwidth it doesn't work out)
Do the others in your house by any chance download *lots* of stuff ? ... that could be affecting your connection ... maybe not ...
If you read thomasb's posts to the L2TP threads you'll see how RADSL differs from DSL (and that I'm not feeding you bull)
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=1103190#post1103190

As I understand it, the contention is happening _only_ in netsource space ... not on the exchanges. So if netsource put you in the same 512k pipe as nine others they've reduced your contention. The problem is you're now contending with heavier than average users - meaning your speeds are suffering. The majority of netsource customers (myself included) have seen an improved service since they took this step (despite what you read on boards !)

Dr_Teeth

It boils down to maths, and Sutty - you may have been the unfortunate one in the ten, who was getting over the "download the entire internet" phase. 10kbps is about 1KB/s ... so the numbers you've given are what can be expected if people do go mad on RADSL ... there's nothing Netsource or any other ISP can do to change that for you.

Christ. Didn't I explain this to you in this thread already? This has NOTHING TO DO WITH DSL CONTENTION.

It has to do with economics. Technically Netsource could accommodate all the users they have without any of the problems we've seen if they just bought more internet bandwidth. It just doesn't make sense to do so, because as they have said 10% of their users were using half of the bandwidth they already had.

The solution to this problem is either to:

a) buy more bandwidth, increasing costs and reducing profit.

or

b) corral the 10% of heavy users until they choke themselves to death (ie cancel their service or pay more for SME).

I don't think anyone here has difficulty understanding why they've gone with option B. If Netsource were a bigger company, or if they hadn't been greedy and waved the 'no cap!!' flag under the noses of all the IOFFL/Boards geeks there wouldn't be a problem.

What people are pissed about is that option B goes against what the service was advertised as, and that it was done without warning.

Now, will you please PLEASE stop telling people that its their own fault for buying a RADSL product. This is completely wrong. Ok?

Teeth.

sutty

Well they say that they will be redoing it every week. So if you are not on it now, you may next week. and the only way you get off it is to stop downloading so much. Which I think is a bit of a lie seeing as there isn't enough bandwidth to download anything. Netsources hole handling of the matter has been a joke. RDSL works fine in Ireland as not enough people are using it. But the problem is on the side of Netsource. They put extra contention on the line. Putting all the "heavy" downloades on one 2meg line and leaving all the people who don't fully use the service (IE: people who use it to access mails and webpages only) to have the rest of the bandwidth.

MrPinK

Putting all the "heavy" downloades on one 2meg line and leaving all the people who don't fully use the service (IE: people who use it to access mails and webpages only) to have the rest of the bandwidth.

There are no users like that on netsource dsl though. Everyone that signed up payed extra because they would have to exceed 5 gigs at least occasionally. If they were lite users they would have gone for eircom or esat.

Eircom and Esat seem to be doing fine ....My esat radsl never drops below 50k d/l pings of 35ms

NS just basicly droped the ball they couldnt sell what they offered and their paying customers (High paying customers) are suffering

It's worth pointing out that 90% of their customers are still getting great download speeds and now decent latency too (getting average or 27ms to boards atm).

SkepticOne

Originally posted by Dr_Teeth
Christ. Didn't I explain this to you in this thread already? This has NOTHING TO DO WITH DSL CONTENTION.

It has to do with economics. Technically Netsource could accommodate all the users they have without any of the problems we've seen if they just bought more internet bandwidth. It just doesn't make sense to do so, because as they have said 10% of their users were using half of the bandwidth they already had.

The solution to this problem is either to:

a) buy more bandwidth, increasing costs and reducing profit.

or

b) corral the 10% of heavy users until they choke themselves to death (ie cancel their service or pay more for SME).

What they have done is a combination of these two. They have coralled the heavy users, but not only that, according to Netsource, they have given the heavy users extra bandwidth.

Instead of 48 users sharing 512k only 10 share 512k. More bandwidth per user.

10:1 is very good by normal standards. If the heavy users could agree with each other to moderate their usage, they would be on a very good service and each could download far more than would be possible on a normal service.

sutty

Except for one thing SkepticOne, the 48:1 contention is done on the exchange and not by netsource. They them selfs are saying that the 48:1 thing never worked out as not enough people where going for the RDSL service. So to many people had full 512Kbs when they thought people would be getting contention and lowing there bandwidth. Seeing as this never happend they enfoced their own contention on top of the 48:1. This is done on the Netsorce side after the one on the exchange. If they had it somewhere that using what ever amount of bandwidth a month would get you peanalised then fair enough. But from what they where saying on here and on the phone. It was an unmeterd service. So why are we paying for it now?

As for pings before. I know I never had any problems with them. And my downloads always where able to get 50+ when I was the only one using the line. So how come I never seamed to have problems. But everyone else did? Or how about the fact that they say that the only reasion they didn't warn anyone about this is because they wanted to sort it out fast... yet even after they had done it, they never told anyone. I mean it is only 40 people. About 40 minutes work to do up a e-mail and mail it to them all.... hardly back braking to just warn people. If you ask me, I think they tryed to pull a fast one and it back fired on them.

SkepticOne

It looks like there are two points at which contention may occur. Before corralling the heavy users, contention was mainly felt at the exchange level. If you were the only heavy user at a particular exchange or were one of only a small number, then you would not experience much slow down and neither would the other users. However, if you were on an exchange with many heavy users as a proportion of all users, then all users on that exchange would experience a great slowdown.

Netsource, however, can't corral heavy users at the exchange level. The wholesale product does not allow for this. So they must do so at their POP. This means that you are experience the slowdown due to heavy users on other exchanges.

This solves the slow down for light users on these other exchanges.

It still means that the heavy users as a whole are on a 10:1 service and if they could agree with themselves to moderate their useage, then each could download far more than they normally could on a 48:1 ratio service.

On a 48:1 service the maximum average download is only 3.24 gigs or thereabouts (longword worked it out). You should be able to download 5 times that amount and still have a useable service.

eth0_

Surely, at the end of the day, they're not supplying the service you signed a contract with them to provide? DSL is at least 'ten times faster than dial up', the ISP's say in their sales blurb, yet sutty et al aren't getting this. Sure they have a TOS but i'm sure legally it'd be frowned upon that they didn't even warn the 'heavy downloaders' about their behaviour.
What exactly does it say in the contract about heavy downloading? On an uncapped service, how can they tell you you're abusing your connection when there is NO GUIDELINE about daily download limits? And if they DO have a 'limit', then this product in practice contradicts how it has been desribed in their sales pitch!

Sutty, didn't you say you doubted you'd downloaded as much as they say you have? Have you demanded records from them showing how you've 'abused' the service?

sutty

Well I my self didn't thats for sure, but with the other lads on the line then the 1.3gigs may have been reached. one thing though. Ok 1.3gigs may have been used. but in 24 hours on a 512link you can download just over 4gigs. If I'm right. anyway. that means daly just over one third of the bandwidth was being used. So the real question we suold be asking is


What does "heavy downloaders" mean? What useage in terms of bandwidth, is "heavy downloading"? Like what is the daily limit they are going by. the people who aren't on the "heavy downloades" have to remember that each week the list is going to be redone. If all the "heavy downloaders" are only able to get a few k a second then who will become the "heavy downloaders" next week?


just something for ye to think about. Think I might ring up netsource tomorrow and see what they say.

SkepticOne

Originally posted by eth0_
Surely, at the end of the day, they're not supplying the service you signed a contract with them to provide? DSL is at least 'ten times faster than dial up', the ISP's say in their sales blurb, yet sutty et al aren't getting this. Sure they have a TOS but i'm sure legally it'd be frowned upon that they didn't even warn the 'heavy downloaders' about their behaviour.

This is where I disagree with Netsource too. No ISP should advertise guaranteed download speeds if they can't deliver on them. They should have said "up to". In addition, they should have warned the users that they were going to place the heavy users together sharing.