Virgin ISP - Throttling For All Users

[KM]

It is more likely yourself is the reader of such a manual, as stated many times I,m not happy with any ISP taking money for a service they dont intend to supply, you seem rather pro throttling and that could be why we are not likely to see an anti throttling patch at anytime soon.

(actually folks there are real reasons why that feature could not be included in the patch currently but dont say anything to KM, I expect miracles as standard  )

anything to uncap your modem to speed up your connection would be against the terms and conditions of any connection, and not to mention unfair on every other user of the ISP...

not to mention that virgin are currently effectively pro-p2p, and are about the only ones not running anti-p2p systems, so including some feature to bypass ISP basic security and screwing with users settings for absolutely no purpose would hardly help matters, all it would do is make them more likely to impose anti-p2p measures (such as the p2p blocking/throttling/etc seen on many other ISPs) - as p2p would stop being merely something that uses bandwidth and would suddenly be an uncapping tool

not to mention that expecting a p2p program to uncap your modem is about as ridiculous as expecting your toaster to make coffee

[Victim]

*edit: changed pic as per victim's wish - nylly

[KM]

that's a coffee maker that also makes toast, not a toaster that makes coffee...

a coffee pot making toast is perfectly logical, but a coffee making toaster is ridiculous

[Victim]

O.o

Okkk..

[GhostShip]

How is it possoile for me to not inform people that the ISP they signed up with is making a major change in the service it delivers ?

I think two folks here should stop apologising for Virgins actions and just clearly state they dont care what Virgin does, I do.

Not once have eithter Bearded or KM said anything about the feburary leak of impending throttling and the subsequent big campaign to gain users, then the sudden imposing of this global throttling, instead they have both focused on making excuses rather than acknowledge the rather clear fact to any who are not Virgin customers unlike themselves, those who paid for a service thats not throttled should receive it, informing users that they intend to unilateraly activate some small print clause in the contract is not what I call the actions of a fair ISP, and its not just Virgin who are scourged here Bearded its all the ISP,s who defraud users with claims for a service they will not deliver.

When was the last time any of the ISP companies refunded a penny for the downgrading of service, yes thats right folks never, its no use shooting the messenger, the truth is the truth, take it or leave it.

PS: KM your argument about defeating anti p2p filters is completely flawed as most of the other large p2p networks are employing such methods and I dont think the ISP companies care whether Winmx is on the bad list as they do Emule and Bit Torrent, or do you really think they are waiting for us to catch up before imposing some new burden upon us ?

[KM]

you know of another p2p client that comes with uncapping tools to raise the speed of a connection? which is this? i better make a note to never use it as modifying the modems firmware at all is against the terms and conditions, and doing it for that purpose is an instant termination offence

and you seem to be completely clueless on the issue, i suggest you re-read this thread, even your own posts

they have always had throttling, they have merely announced that instead of turning it on and off as required they will instead be turning it on every evening, they will also be changing it to a new much fairer policy, which makes p2p use much better

it's a fact that the handful of abusive users who download 3GB in a couple of hours during peak time can *not* use shared connections and should be paying for dedicated connections - it is not virgins fault that those users won't pay for the connection they want... now rather than kicking them off, they are allowing them to have a connection just not the full 20Mbit (or whichever package you're on)... you still get extremely fast downloads, just during peak time those handful who think it's a dedicated connection get told "piss off and let some others have the bandwidth, use it when they aren't using it" - you can hardly call that unfair, allowing them to steal other users bandwidth would be unfair

although to be honest this doesn't really have anything to do with p2p, as it is not p2p throttling at all, and is just the same thing many ISPs do, except instead of having a monthly limit before imposing throttling for the rest of the month they instead have a really high peak time limit that only throttles for a few hours

[GhostShip]

Perhaps you should learn to read KM, you are the only one mentioning uncapping, I make reference to anti throttling, can I ask you to stop wasting my time further by attempting to put your words and claiming they are mine.

[KM]

removing/modifying the speed of a connection is called uncapping

you have stated that thereis a p2p program which increases the speed of the connection when it has been throttled down, or uncaps it as it is also known

[GhostShip]

Capping is the limiting of the connection regardless of usage, throttling is the selective limiting of the connection, those are my definitions and of course open to dispute but they provide a small but important gap between what I,m speaking about and what your claiming I,m speaking about KM.

Most of you can check if your being throttled by comparing how long it takes for a website download to finish as opposed to how long it takes for a comparable mp3 of the same size on winmx, theoretically they should match , but in the throttled world the ISP will detect a known trait of the winmx file transfer system and intervene in the connection, making it crawl to a dead stop in many cases, in the case of capping any and all connections will ride along at a comparable speed regardless of origin.

Whilst no one has to agree with me I dont feel its an iSP's right to decide as they are attempting with dubious methods what services I can access, why should they penalise me for using winmx when its the sole reason I have an internet connection, based I may add on a phone line that I have to pay rental for and never use, something you have no choice on, so taken as a whole I,m already paying a stealth tax for the internet access.

They can of course levy higher charges on folks like myself who want to use winmx, but have chosen not to, so this makes any claims about winmx or any other users usage habits null and void, we can and do pay for a service they have offered and would in most cases be willing to pay more if required, can we be held to account for any corporate loss of profits for attempting to use the service they have sold us, or are they only interested in the part time net users who use email once a week and pay for the service all year around to sit idle, you choose folks.

[RëpösÄñgê£]

I Joined BT in april and i must say i was very dissapointed In the service i got ,I was connected on 17th april lost connection daily due to home hub updating was told unplug 10 seconds then plug back in and should work. On The 23rd april i lost connection tried unpluggin it 10 secs and wouldnt connect so i called BT TECH DEPT what a buncha a***holes I was lied to for 4 days saying was fault on line and engineer was working on it and all the time they knew my account been ceased due to major complication with changing over from pipex(which also sux), then was told i would have to wait 3 weeks to get my broadband back .Very Very poor customer services .I wasnt even offered dial-up while this issue was solved i had to pratically beg them for it. I reported  them to ISPA . I ended up telling BT where to shove there equipment etc. 
I gave Virgin Media a call i got fantastic deal and they sent engineer out 2 days after to install everything , been with them 2 weeks now and must say i have got no complaints at all so far one the best ISP i EVER been with . I will Keep u posted how it goes.

[KM]

i hope all will note my previous posts where i stated that ghostship was not actually talking about the virgin in the slightest, and his confirmation of that fact above

virgin do not have any plans at all to do anything to p2p at all, their throttling has absolutely nothing to do with p2p (except the fact that heavy p2p users are the most likely to use it, due to most large files being transferred over p2p networks)

if you use your *connection* to download the stated amounts for your package, for example using a lot of video websites, downloading from p2p, whatever, makes absolutely no difference how you use it... then your *connection* speed will be dropped to the relevant speed for your package for a few hours

the BT policy towards "peak bandwidth management" (as they call it) which ghostship supports is to break p2p, no matter what type of user you are - he is supporting these actions by not only arguing against alternative methods, but also by paying to support that p2p breaking method

the virgin policy towards "peak bandwidth management" is that anyone maxing out their connection a lot during peak time will be classed as a heavy user, those limits are high enough that only unreasonable people will be classed as heavy users - once classed as a heavy user that user will have their connection speed decreased (to a still ridiculously fast connection) for a short period to avoid them having as much impact on other light users... this is the method I support, as not only does it only penalise heavy users, but it also doesn't penalise specific types of users, it doesn't matter what you use the bandwidth for only how much you use (which let's face it all that really matters is how much is used, it doesn't cost them any more for different types of traffic)

[GhostShip]

I note KM is now making more claims that are untrue and so lets call them lies as we would if any of the pie team made the same claims, after not apologising for trying to mislead folks over what I said he is now attempting to tell a bare faced lie, I do not and have never supported capping or throttling.

KM is now claiming lamely that I support throttling because I live in an area where the ISP I am forced to use are the only service offering unlimited usage, this shows how stupid he is getting with his claims.

I await a retraction of both of your misleading claims KM, stop trying to invent off topic reasons to make yourself right, your wrong to make false claims and its plain to all.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi RëpösÄñgê£ , I too have had bad service from both BT and Bulldog, both seem unable to deliver what they claim, Bulldog even inventing technicalities to try to break the contract they had made with me, I hope reading this thread you dont get the idea that Virgin are the only villians in the UK, far from it, but I do think if a service is purchased it should be delivered without strings and small print, after all thats why we willingly pay up each month.

[KM]

so who is supporting BT if it isn't those discouraging users to use their competition, and also sending money to them?

you however have lied in this thread trying to claim that virgin are blocking/screwing with p2p and basically doing things anti-p2p, they are not, as made clear in the very announcement you quoted at the start, as well as in various other announcements regarding their controlling the speed of the connections... it has absolutely nothing to do with p2p, yet you are telling lies claiming it is in a way to stop users using it, and in effect also telling users that this alternative solution to the problem is a bad idea, and discouraging other ISPs from taking it up - you are one of those encouraging ISPs to use the "break p2p" method of saving money

[Micromecca]

I had to laugh when I read this thread, not because I think he situation is funny, but because the people complaining over the use of ellacoya (throttling) technology are missing something.
You pay your 30 quid a month (or whatever it is) for a 50:1 contended connection, whether thats 2, 4, 10 or the new 20mbit service, your sharing that bandwidth with 50 other users.
I wonder how you would feel if all of those 50 users had the same views as yourselves and took advantage of the throughput 'whenever they wanted' well actually I can tell you, you'd all be looking pretty sick as you started to feel the pinch !

As KM stated, if your expecting that sort of throughput 24/7 then put your hand in your pocket and pay for a dedicated line.

When services like BT Vision become common place, all dsl users should expect the same sort of impact on P2P traffic that cable customers are starting to experience, Plusnet for one have already implemented ellacoya technology in preparation for these services. You may ask why this is and I can tell you, BT thats why, the cost of a 622 Mbit BT Central  is around £1,750,000  Per Annum, now I'm no Carol Vorderman, but even I can see why ISP's are struggling to offer 24/7 throughput at end users max line speeds, the maths just doesnt add up.

I've no idea how Virgin operate, but I'm pretty sure they will have similar costs to deal with somehwere in the equation !

 

[KM]

the costs for virgin aren't the same, they don't have to deal with BT costs as they sell direct to end users

however they do have only 50Mbit per downstream channel, which means that although they don't have direct costs for end users depending on bandwidth (although of course they have to pay for transit costs), they do have limited capacity on each cable line

and of course they can put more and more users on the same cable line, and the capacity stays the same - they can split a single line in to 2 segments (2 separate lines) however it costs them a lot as they have to put in a new set of equipment for the additional segment

[GhostShip]

I shall get my violin out for the poor ISP's who mislead the public and offer a service they do not intend to supply, whilst I understand why they do such things it neither mitigates nor justifies their efforts to avoid providing what they offered those who had contracts pre-announcement.

Your failure to apologise KM has been noted.

[Bearded Blunder]

your insistance that isp's should be forced to sell nothing but dedicateed lines is the problem in this thread ghost.. if you still don't get what contended services are about, & why they're the solution for home use, i suggest pricing the equivalent speed dedicated line, to see what isps would have to charge for a 20 Mbit connection where they could guarantee througput 24/7.. & they DO all state you're getting a contended service somewhere in the contract.. or is your advive that nobody should check further than the banner adverts?

the situation here is more akin to germany's fast motorways, you pay your motoring taxes to use roads with no speed limit, but you still can't drive at 14omph when the traffic is heavy.. if you try you'll (quite rightly) be stopped for being dangerous & disrupting it for everyone else on the "fast road", in fact the urban sections even have speed limits at peak times..

just because you buy a bus ticket (contended line) doesn't mean you control the bus, there are the others sharing it to consider.. if you insist on having that degree of service to pick your route, you pay for the much more expensive taxi (dedicated line) it's really that simple..

[Micromecca]

I like that analogy !

buy your own road !

[KM]

indeed, you pay to use the shared roads, you want a road to yourself you could do it if you wanted, it'd just cost a damn lot to buy land and lay roads to everywhere yourself

[Micromecca]

I do pay for a leased line remember 

* I¥Iî¢rôI¥Iꢢâ gulps