North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users"
- From: Jamie Norwood
- Date: Thu Jan 31 13:07:10 2002
On Thu, Jan 31, 2002 at 09:47:46AM -0800, Rowland, Alan D wrote:
> I've seen a lot of good responses since this post but none that points out
> the obvious, most broadband providers offer 'residential' and 'business'
> products. The former at ~$50/month for a 'single connection,' the latter for
> ~$120/month including most of the services at issue in this thread. You get
> what you pay for.
I would debate the 'most' part of this, especially on the cable broadband
side of things. I've worked for two cable providers now, and neither had
a real option for multiple computers. On top of that, I've had three other
cable accounts; one was strictly one-IP-only, the other two were two IPs.
Neither had any provision for more. The household I am in now has three
computers... What choice do I have other than NAT? I would gladly pay
another $5/mo for IPs. But that isn't an option. Get xDSL? Not an option
where I am.
In short, don't say 'most' as a rule when it is more likely 'Most in
my area', or even more likely, 'Some'.
> Some day case law will catch up to this new media enough that when a
> 'residential' service customer seeks remedy for $X,000 in 'lost business'
> the defense will be that if they want a 'business' connection, then that is
> what they should have signed up for/been paying for.
IIRC, this has been and gone. i am pretty sure @Home had a lawsuit or
three based on just that, and replied with exactly that response. Conversely,
as more and more ISPs advertise 'Work from home' accounts, but only offer
one kind of broadband account, then they DO leave themselves open
> When 1% of your users are sucking down %50+ of your bandwidth you may need
> to discuss AUPs with that 1%. Don't expect your shareholders to cut you any
> slack on this issue.
This is a definite fact, yes. What isn't clear is how people running NAT
either use significantly more bandwidth, let alone '50%+'. And frankly,
if I buy a connection, I use it. It is not MY job to make sure you have
enough bandwidth on your backbone. If I get a T1, and use a T1, there
is no accusation of abuse. If I get a 1.5Mb DSL or 512k cable connection
and use those speeds... How is that abuse? All the equipment currently
out here allows rate limiting. Use it.
> Just my 2¢, feel free to use your delete key.