Is anybody on th 10mb broadband from NTL/UPC?

seamus

IrishTLR wrote: »

What is your basis for stating that companies with ten times the hardware would struggle to reach that bandwidth, or is it pure speculation or personal experience in your company? I fail to see that as a valid argument.

Personal experience seeing a number of companies. The point being that companies (theoretically) have a hell of a lot more users accessing the web (and email) concurrently than a single user and his 4 machines, yet they still don't use that kind of bandwidth. But yes, it's a rough metric because different businesses have different needs.

but UPC do not give ANY indication of what fair usage is. They say unlimited. How are we to know if we are going over the limit until you start getting threatening letters. We all know that it's marketing. It they specified limits, they couldn't advertise it as unlimited.

Check the contract that you signed or agreed to when you got the package. It may say "unlimited", but there's a contract there which gives their AUP and the steps they will take if that's broken. There may even be a specific amount specified in this contract. If you didn't agree with the definition of "unlimited", you had the option of not signing the contract.

AUPs and download ceilings are nothing new and shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone using even "unlimited" packages.

In reality, this has been tested before and it's not false advertising because there is no way you could hold any provider to an "unlimited" clause, simply because providing an unlimited service is a physical impossibility. Instead "unlimited" amounts to a service which provides an allowance well beyond what would be considered normal or even heavy use. Which is what 250GB is, for a residential user. You'll notice that they don't provide an "unlimited" package for business, because 250GB would be easily reached by a medium-sized company (60+ people).

ionix5891

UPC have a peering arrangement of 100gbit (thats 3000TB a month for all their customers)

youre 200GB is a waste of paper for them im surprised they even bothered, could be automated system

Blindpew

I'm not surprised by the letter as I wasn't expecting the service to be unlimited, even though i says it is. It's very easy exceed 250gbs in a month when they combine uploads and downloads. Traffic both ways was over 450gb last month.
As no one has posted figures before I thought I'd let people know what the "unlimited service" limits are.

seamus

3000TB = 3,072,000GB

UPC signed up their 100,000th cable customer in December. Which means that their allowance per customer is technically 30GB/month. Some customers use much more than that, but most use much, much less.

Like most services, it's oversold, but it's possible to operate because the limits imposed are far beyond what's required normally. Gmail for example offers 10GB (?) of storage. It doesn't have enough storage to service every single Gmail account, but it doesn't have to because most people barely scratch the surface of that 10GB.

If you think about 250GB of downloads - that's the equivalent of using the max. bandwith of 8 customers. So if just one-eighth of NTL's customers were to act like this, their network would effectively max out. So they need to nip to it in the bud.

ionix5891

seamus wrote: »

3000TB = 3,072,000GB

UPC signed up their 100,000th cable customer in December. Which means that their allowance per customer is technically 30GB/month. Some customers use much more than that, but most use much, much less.

Like most services, it's oversold, but it's possible to operate because the limits imposed are far beyond what's required normally. Gmail for example offers 10GB (?) of storage. It doesn't have enough storage to service every single Gmail account, but it doesn't have to because most people barely scratch the surface of that 10GB.

If you think about 250GB of downloads - that's the equivalent of using the max. bandwith of 8 customers. So if just one-eighth of NTL's customers were to act like this, their network would effectively max out. So they need to nip to it in the bud.

sorry 100gbit is their average traffic levels (mostly inbound, meaning customers downloading onto network) not their max (also note we have no way of knowing what private arrangements for bandwidth commits they could have with backbone providers)

see http://www.peeringdb.com/view.php?asn=6830 for data

they would have no issues peering for free with large datacenters with (mostly outbound) traffic and the bandwidth would cost them nothing, they peer at the worlds largest exchange in the Dam so they have access to some nice cost savings options

btw Eircom are much smaller

http://www.peeringdb.com/view.php?asn=5466

RangeR

Blindpew wrote: »

I'm not surprised by the letter as I wasn't expecting the service to be unlimited, even though i says it is. It's very easy exceed 250gbs in a month when they combine uploads and downloads. Traffic both ways was over 450gb last month.
As no one has posted figures before I thought I'd let people know what the "unlimited service" limits are.

Ok, even I think that's an absurd amount of monthly traffic for a residential user.

Considering you said that your upload was a good part of your 450GB, that is some SERIOUS uploading. Very few internet applications consume that amount of upload bandwidth. You ARE taking the pi$$ with your connection in a serious way.

ionix5891

IrishTLR wrote: »

Ok, even I think that's an absurd amount of monthly traffic for a residential user.

Considering you said that your upload was a good part of your 450GB, that is some SERIOUS uploading. Very few internet applications consume that amount of upload bandwidth. You ARE taking the pi$$ with your connection in a serious way.

no hes not costing them much (but yes thats quite a bit for a home connection)

i manage a cluster of 12 servers in Chicago

uses 1.4gbit average a month (outgoing, from the servers), note that incoming bandwidth is free ( i only use 50mbit average incoming)

the bandwidth is charged at 4.5 US$ per mbit outgoing @ 95th %percentile



so assuming UPC pay same to most likely nothing for their bandwidth, no hes not taking the pi$$

as i said UPC would have no issue peering with large data centers for free

.

ionix5891

btw heres what the INEX uses in dublin as a comparison ( https://www.inex.ie/technical/stats )



people really need to start backing up statements about heavy bandwidth usage with facts like i try to do

bandwidth is getting cheaper by the day

RangeR

ionix5891 wrote: »

no hes not

i manage a cluster of 12 servers in Chicago

uses 1.4gbit average a month (outgoing, from the servers), note that incoming bandwidth is free ( i only use 50mbit average incoming)

the bandwidth is charged at 4.5 US$ per mbit outgoing @ 95th %percentile


so assuming UPC pay same to most likely nothing for their bandwidth, no hes not taking the pi$$

as i said UPC would have no issue peering with large data centers for free

.

Apples and oranges. Your example doesn't seem to be a residential package or based in Ireland. I stand by my assertion that he is taking the pi$$. I'm not interested in what it does and does not cost UPC in direct costs. I'm more concerned with the broadband usage of customers in that area. It has a huge effect.

JDxtra

There is no such thing as a truely unlimited service. Just be glad you are with UPC (compared to other ISPs) and get over it. Downloading that amount of data each month on a consistent basis is just obscene.

ionix5891

IrishTLR wrote: »

Apples and oranges. Your example doesn't seem to be a residential package or based in Ireland. I stand by my assertion that he is taking the pi$$. I'm not interested in what it does and does not cost UPC in direct costs. I'm more concerned with the broadband usage of customers in that area. It has a huge effect.

hes not on ADSL so his unlikely to be causing any slowdown due to the way UPCs network is build

yes it is heavy usage (if you take it as a % of the total UPC usage as per data i provided) what hes doing but i can almost guarantee its not costing UPC that much and they are still making a nice profit margin (remember UPC are a company, and companies exist to make money, providing a good service is a means to an end not the end) on this customer

if you work in bandwidth related business for a while you learn that a small % of customers always use alot of bandwidth, but the larger your bandwidth pool the less this is noticed

im not advocating that usage, i myself max ever used 100GB in a month, ive not time to be downloading **** instead i get to do work (and comment on boards :P )

.

vibe666

seamus wrote: »

So overall, the usage works out at 210GB. Which you admit is a heavy month. And it is - your setup is rare, as is the pure volume of data you're downloading. Companies with ten times the number of machines would struggle to download that kind of volume from the web.

here we go, the self appointed internet police are out in force again. :rolleyes:

by your imaginary calculations you have completely failed to take account of any uploaded data which even if it was only 50gb has put him over that 250gb limit as UPC count it as down+up=total.

what's the point of having 20mbps broadband if you're not going to use it to it's full potential? i thought we were trying to push broadband forwards not backwards?

just because you don't make the most of it, doesn't mean it's absurd. i can't ever imagine spending 500-1000€ a month on clothes or beer but i know plenty of people who do and I'm more than happy to leave them to do what they want, it's their own business. i'm not in charge of them any more than you are in charge of what people do on the internet.

UPC are planning on having all their territories upgraded to 100mbps by the end of THIS year in line with holland and (afaik) sweden who already have it (according to an article published last year). if people aren't utilising what they already have as much as possible then why would they even bother to upgrade anything at all?

I'm on the 20mbps 'unlimited' package as well and got a letter in the post today saying the same thing about exceeding the 250gb per month limit on the plainly advertised *unlimited* product I'm paying for. i have quite a few friends who aren't able to get anything but dialup so I do a lot of downloads for them as well as having a very similar set up to the other dude who got the letter, 4 desktop PC's, a laptop, a netbook, ps3, wii & xbox as well as running an FTP server and a web server I use the internet a LOT for personal and soho work and my combined up/down usage in the last month was around 360gb in total.

i have no problem with certain products being capped, what I do have a problem is with an ISP claiming an uncapped service and making it a big selling point of that product but then making up a random number and calling it a FUP when it is very plainly a CAP, and then NOT telling people what that is (even when I asked them) and then sending threatening letters when this imaginary limit is reached.

if you are going to set a limit on how much data a customer can transfer then call it a cap and tell people what it is, END OF STORY!

i did some research on here before i signed up and the general opinion at the time was that NTL/UPC would leave you alone until you passed at least 600gb per month on the 20mbps package, so I went for that on that basis as I idn't think even I'd manage that and that I could not get any answer out of upc on the subject.

the good news is, they seem to have a broadband 'extreme' product that they don't advertise for €80 per month which I may upgrade to if my usage continues to warrant it and in fact it seems that UPC will automatically upgrade me anyway if I keep using over 250gb up/down in a month, so I might just carry on how I am and see how long it is before they bump me up to this 'extreme' package automatically.

so hands up who's going to be bitching about me downloading over 250gb per month when I'm paying extra for the privilege? :rolleyes:

JDxtra

If NTL advertised a cap, many others would use it as a target. But yes, I see your point.

vibe666

if we had a regulator with any balls/teeth every ISP would be called to order on it and forced to clearly state any limits to their customers up front and there would be no issue.

Blindpew

I would agree with everything vibe 666 says. I find it amazing that they can get away with all the false advertising, but I suppose this is Ireland where the more lies you can tell the more success you can attain. I was offered this "extreme package" as well or rather told I would be put on it whether I wanted it or not, if they so decided. There's no mention of the said Extreme 79 Euro a month package on their web site oddly enough. They must reserve it for special customers.

stevenmu

I do have a problem with them calling it an unlimited service if they really have a set 250GB limit, but:

vibe666 wrote: »

I'm on the 20mbps 'unlimited' package as well and got a letter in the post today saying the same thing about exceeding the 250gb per month limit on the plainly advertised *unlimited* product I'm paying for. i have quite a few friends who aren't able to get anything but dialup so I do a lot of downloads for them as well as having a very similar set up to the other dude who got the letter, 4 desktop PC's, a laptop, a netbook, ps3, wii & xbox as well as running an FTP server and a web server I use the internet a LOT for personal and soho work and my combined up/down usage in the last month was around 360gb in total.

if you're running an ftp server, a web server and using it for SOHO work you can't really complain about breaking the acceptable use policy on a residential package.

vibe666

the ftp and web servers are for my own personal use, i'm not running a business of either one of those and as far as the soho side of things does, it's to vpn to my office to work from home once a week so I'd give it 95% personal use for myself and friends and maybe 5% for work but afaik working from home over vpn instead of going into the office wouldn't count as running a business from home.

BUT, as things stand now, if I'd known about the 250gb limit per month I'd have either made some effort to stick to it or upgraded to this extreme package from the start if my usage warranted it on an ongoing basis.

as things stand though i'm still only on my 3 months in with this after being on BT 7.6mbps so i reckon i'm most likely still just stretching my new 20mbps legs and i'll calm down to within those limits before long as i'm starting to run out of stuff to download if i'm perfectly honest, i just don't like being told one thing and then getting threatened with something else foor breaking a rule i didn't know i had.

look on the bright side, if the internet ever goes down totally, I've got an almost complete backup of the whole thing already.

seamus

vibe666 wrote: »

by your imaginary calculations you have completely failed to take account of any uploaded data which even if it was only 50gb has put him over that 250gb limit as UPC count it as down+up=total.

Where have I failed to take account of uploaded data? Any servers running on the connection are against the terms of service, so they're irrelevant. On a residential connection, upload is: Web browsing, email, ftp out and other non-server uploads.

i have no problem with certain products being capped, what I do have a problem is with an ISP claiming an uncapped service and making it a big selling point of that product but then making up a random number and calling it a FUP when it is very plainly a CAP, and then NOT telling people what that is (even when I asked them) and then sending threatening letters when this imaginary limit is reached.

Again, go back to the contract you signed. There's downloading/uploading a fair amount of data, a lot of data, and then there's taking the piss.
Perhaps you've embraced the all-online experience where you've interconnected permanently with every device and service you can get your hands on and almost all of your business and entertainment comes from the web. And good for you. But the rest of the planet hasn't caught up with you yet. Early adopters always pay the most to get in there first.

Blindpew

vibe666 wrote: »

look on the bright side, if the internet ever goes down totally, I've got an almost complete backup of the whole thing already.

Yea, and if you find you are missing anything just contact me, as I probably have it.

RangeR

seamus wrote: »

Where have I failed to take account of uploaded data? Any servers running on the connection are against the terms of service, so they're irrelevant. On a residential connection, upload is: Web browsing, email, ftp out and other non-server uploads.

I believe he was talking about the calculations you performed on my usage.

seamus wrote: »

Again, go back to the contract you signed. There's downloading/uploading a fair amount of data, a lot of data, and then there's taking the piss.
Perhaps you've embraced the all-online experience where you've interconnected permanently with every device and service you can get your hands on and almost all of your business and entertainment comes from the web. And good for you. But the rest of the planet hasn't caught up with you yet. Early adopters always pay the most to get in there first.

Believe it or not, I did NOT sign a contract for my Broadband. I had an existing TV multiroom service with them. I rang them up and asked about getting broadband. They put it on my account, then and there. Engineer was out within a week to set it up.

I don't believe I signed anything other than a delivery docket or something.

I DO run a soho [ps in sig, email, VoIP and browsing mostly] with my internet connection. I was VERY upfront with UPC with I was inquiring and they had no problem with it.

vibe666

seamus wrote: »

Where have I failed to take account of uploaded data? Any servers running on the connection are against the terms of service, so they're irrelevant. On a residential connection, upload is: Web browsing, email, ftp out and other non-server uploads.

i'm not running any servers for business, only my own personal use and i'm not making any money of any of them. so no, not against the TOS.

anyway, what about everyone's favourite uploaderiffic pastime torrenting? it wouldn't be outside of the realms of possibility that someone who had leeched overly much on their BT or eircom connection and wanted to give a bit back to the community and as a result set their seeding ratio nice and high to share and share alike as it were.

seamus wrote: »

Again, go back to the contract you signed.

again, didn't sign a contract just a delivery note to confirm the engineer had been out.

seamus wrote: »

There's downloading/uploading a fair amount of data, a lot of data, and then there's taking the piss.

back to the internet police again. can I see your badge sir?:rolleyes:

maybe you'd like to explain exactly how much that is supposed to be if people are told it's unlimited? what is fair? i thought 600gb was fair when i looked into it when i signed up. personally i don't think 250gb is fair on a 20mbps connection but if NTL/UPC had said so at the start, i wouldn't have a problem with it and would have adjusted my downloads accordingly.

here's an analogy for you, what about if there were no speed limit signs on the roads and people were told they could drive as fast as they wanted 'within reason'. wouldn't you be a bit miffed if you got pulled over because what YOU thought was a reasonable speed wasn't what the Garda thought was a reasonable speed? that wouldn't be fair would it?

ionix5891

vibe666 wrote: »

i'm not running any servers for business, only my own personal use and i'm not making any money of any of them. so no, not against the TOS.

anyway, what about everyone's favourite uploaderiffic pastime torrenting? it wouldn't be outside of the realms of possibility that someone who had leeched overly much on their BT or eircom connection and wanted to give a bit back to the community and as a result set their seeding ratio nice and high to share and share alike as it were.
again, didn't sign a contract just a delivery note to confirm the engineer had been out.
back to the internet police again. can I see your badge sir?:rolleyes:

maybe you'd like to explain exactly how much that is supposed to be if people are told it's unlimited? what is fair? i thought 600gb was fair when i looked into it when i signed up. personally i don't think 250gb is fair on a 20mbps connection but if NTL/UPC had said so at the start, i wouldn't have a problem with it and would have adjusted my downloads accordingly.

here's an analogy for you, what about if there were no speed limit signs on the roads and people were told they could drive as fast as they wanted 'within reason'. wouldn't you be a bit miffed if you got pulled over because what YOU thought was a reasonable speed wasn't what the Garda thought was a reasonable speed? that wouldn't be fair would it?

dont waste your breath they are just jealous they are stuck with their ****ty slow eircom connections who are now strip searching all their packets

once they get out of their midband mentality we can welcome these culchies to the broad new world

.

escobar

ionix5891 wrote: »

dont waste your breath they are just jealous they are stuck with their ****ty slow eircom connections who are now strip searching all their packets

once they get out of their midband mentality we can welcome these culchies to the broad new world

.

Slow and incredibly overpriced. I was on Eircom before ntl and I got a 3 mb connection for €58 Now I'm paying €20 for the exact same connection speed.
Seriously, any broadband connection where you pay €25 rental before you get anything is a joke, i.e. eircom, bt broadband, perlico etc...

Anyways eircom just went through a nasty courtcase

vibe666

aside from anything, it's early adopters and people using a lot of bandwidth that pushes broadband speeds to the next level.

if it wasn't for people like us, everyone would still be using 512kbps connections and calling it broadband.

do you think anyone in holland needs 100mbps to send emails, surf the net and download windows updates?

do you think anyone in japan or korea needs 1gbps connections at home for those same reasons?

suck it up, people like us are the reason 20mbps cable broadband even exists in ireland and NTL/UPC is the only reason eircom and the like are forced to increase their speeds to try and keep up.

Blindpew

I second that emotion, it's just a pity that UPC don't recognise us for the true innovators that we are, and give us the "Extreme" package for the price of the "Ultra Unlimited" package. After all they owe their very existance to us.

escobar

Blindpew wrote: »

I second that emotion, it's just a pity that UPC don't recognise us for the true innovators that we are, and give us the "Extreme" package for the price of the "Ultra Unlimited" package. After all they owe their very existance to us.

A little tongue in cheek I think....:rolleyes:

They're already far lower in price and far faster than anyone else out there. Have to say since I joined them I've never been happier.

Getting back to the thread title The 10 mb broadband is great and I've had no trouble with it at all. Get on it would be my advice

vibe666

Blindpew wrote: »

I second that emotion, it's just a pity that UPC don't recognise us for the true innovators that we are, and give us the "Extreme" package for the price of the "Ultra Unlimited" package. After all they owe their very existance to us.

viva la revolution!