[TriLUG] OT - TWC bandwidth caps on the way?

jonc at nc.rr.com jonc at nc.rr.com
Wed Jun 4 10:20:25 EDT 2008 

40GB won't endanger any VoIP carrier that I've ever heard off... VoIP requires continuous low latency connections, but very little bandwidth.

Vonage: 1hr = 300Mb (max)
FeatureTel: 1hr = 100Mb (max)
  "max" means all talking all the time - no pauses (like listening to music)

Vonage uses G711 codec which maxes out at 87 Kbps
FeatureTel defaults to G729 codec (voice only - no noise) which maxes out at 31 Kbps

===
On the bright-side, maybe folks will stop sending me these gi-normous attached documents that contain a few lines of text that I need to read....

Jon Carnes

---- Ben Pitzer <bpitzer at gmail.com> wrote: 
> It just occurred to me that this is a very effective way to kill Vonage or
> other VOIP providers on their network.  I somehow doubt that TWC digital
> phone service is counted against that bandwidth cap, but you can be damned
> sure that Vonage or Skype are counted against that 40GB.  I wonder how much
> bandwidth is taken by a 1 hr conversation on Vonage.....
> 
> My issue will be with my mail server.  I wouldn't be surprised if I get
> 10-20GB per month in spam and viruses alone.  Which brings up another
> issue....could you sue Microsoft for the overrun cost of your monthly cable
> Internet bill if your PC gets infected with a self-replicating virus,
> malware program, trojan or worm that comes as a result of an OS exploit?  Or
> other software providers, for that matter, if their product is the
> vulnerable one.  Apple could get sued for such things as a result of
> vulnerabilities in Safari, for example.
> 
> Let's also talk about sabotage.  Find your enemy online and start hping2 to
> constantly connect to some open port from a spoofed IP.  Do it unobtrusively
> enough, and you wouldn't get caught easily, but you might push him over the
> top of his bandwidth cap and cost him money.  How is TWC going to protect
> against that type of fraud?
> 
> Look, I can see bandwidth caps on budget tiers of service, like their RR
> Lite service, and may be even on the standard tier, but there should
> absolutely be an uncapped tier as well.  Hell, just trying to use bittorrent
> to pull down a Linux distro.  The Debian DVD image is 4.4GB alone, meaning
> 11% of the bandwidth cap mentioned in that article, even before it's
> installed and patches and security updates are applied.
> 
> -Ben Pitzer
> 
> 
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 11:59 AM, <OlsonE at aosa.army.mil> wrote:
> 
> > TimeWarner can suck it if this happens in our area. I'd even go as far
> > as droping all of my services with them. I've had my finger on the
> > trigger for a long time, until that last b/w increase ...which cooled me
> > off for a bit.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: trilug-bounces at trilug.org [mailto:trilug-bounces at trilug.org] On
> > Behalf Of Greg Brown
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 11:36 AM
> > To: Triangle Linux Users Group General Discussion
> > Subject: Re: [TriLUG] OT - TWC bandwidth caps on the way?
> >
> > Fark it all.  Good thing I just spent $100 on the Roku and I'm sure glad
> > I
> > rent movies on my Apple TV.   Ted Stevens was right... the Internet
> > isn't a
> > big truck you can just dump something on.  At least not without paying
> > the
> > truck owner, the driver, the driver's union, the highway tax, the fuel,
> > new
> > tires for the truck, the driver's lunch, a tax for a worker to clean up
> > the
> > roadkill hit by the driver............
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 11:25 AM, Jason Watts <jsnonzzr at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Wasn't it posted by someone that when you guys got your rate increase,
> > that
> > > the bill increase was shortly to follow?
> > >
> > > Subscriber:  "WHAT, my bill just went up $64k"
> > > TWC:  "True, but you can download things a 2k quicker."
> > >
> > > Heath,  if those numbers are right and they carry over to dsl... I
> > guess
> > > the
> > > only surfing I do will be done at from work.
> > > On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Nick Goldwater <trilug at dogstar1.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > If all of this is in the works and they are oversubscribed then why
> > boost
> > > > the speeds?
> > > > I sort of like the idea of no speed caps and perhaps 0.15 per gig...
> > > > similar to Amazon pricing.
> > > >
> > > > Nick
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- "Heath Roberts" <htroberts at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > | Interesting. For $54.90 per month, you can use 15 megabits per
> > second
> > > > | for 26
> > > > | minutes (40-gigabyte cap, assumed 10 bits per byte). If you
> > include
> > > > | IP
> > > > | overhead, maybe 20-23 minutes per month. After that it's $90/hr,
> > or
> > > > | $64K per
> > > > | month. That should certainly help "finance the needed investment
> > in
> > > > | the
> > > > | infrastructure".
> > > > |
> > > > | I know that broadband access has always been oversubscribed, and
> > the
> > > > | providers have been extremely close-lipped about by how much, but
> > this
> > > > | seems
> > > > | to say it's by a factor of 2000 or so.
> > > > |
> > > > | On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 10:14 AM, Ben Pitzer <bpitzer at gmail.com>
> > > > | wrote:
> > > > |
> > > > | > Suprised that no one has posted this here yet.  Could this be
> > the
> > > > | end of
> > > > | > the
> > > > | > basically unfettered server functionality on TWC's network?  I'm
> > > > | thinking
> > > > | > that it may be, for me at least.
> > > > | >
> > > > | >
> > > > |
> > >
> > http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jwm8wu3jZWZLcKfIlycqFqFegknwD9126HN8A
> > > > | >
> > > > | > Let the discussions begin.
> > > > | > --
> > > > | > TriLUG mailing list        :
> > > > | http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
> > > > | > TriLUG FAQ  :
> > http://www.trilug.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions
> > > > | >
> > > > |
> > > > |
> > > > |
> > > > | --
> > > > | Heath Roberts
> > > > | htroberts at gmail.com
> > > > | --
> > > > | TriLUG mailing list        :
> > > > | http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
> > > > | TriLUG FAQ  :
> > http://www.trilug.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions
> > > > --
> > > >  TriLUG mailing list        :
> > > > http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
> > > > TriLUG FAQ  : http://www.trilug.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions
> > > >
> > > --
> > > TriLUG mailing list        :
> > http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
> > > TriLUG FAQ  : http://www.trilug.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions
> > >
> > --
> > TriLUG mailing list        :
> > http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
> > TriLUG FAQ  : http://www.trilug.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions
> > --
> > TriLUG mailing list        : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
> > TriLUG FAQ  : http://www.trilug.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions
> >
> -- 
> TriLUG mailing list        : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
> TriLUG FAQ  : http://www.trilug.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions

More information about the TriLUG mailing list