[kwlug-disc] Rogers Bandwith Limit - Consequences of exceeding?

[unsolicited]

Thanks John. I remember some of your Zeke's comments on your moving 
problems (with respect to provider). Seems to me I remember some other 
moaning, something about age, and moving. But I discounted those.

To be clear in this thread ... I'm not looking to change providers.

Just the consequences of exceeding bandwidth.

I don't expect Rogers will completely cut me off under any bandwidth 
circumstances. Some others circumstances, yes, but not bandwidth. No 
doubt, however, should I exceed several months in a row I'll be 
getting more Rogers nonsense about upgrading from Express. <sigh>

FWIW, I was told one story some time ago where Rogers had cut a 
neighbour off (for a week? month? rest of billing period?) due to a 
'virus' [that wasn't there.] Their 'servers' had detected ip scans 
coming from her, starting at 0.0.0.0. The week prior to when she was 
told. i.e. If she had a virus, it was long gone by the time they 
reported it.

Did a little digging and aside from the best practice of not allowing 
incoming X,  it's recommended to not allow outgoing X. Where X is the 
private address space and a whole host of others. Basically, go 
through the list and anything unused (or unreasonable, e.g. military), 
deny both ways. http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/

No complaints were ever received thereafter. Whether she never got 
another ip scanning virus, or she did and it wasn't noticed because it 
didn't start at 0, I'll never know.


john at netdirect.ca wrote, On 01/30/2009 6:45 PM:
> -----kwlug-disc-bounces at kwlug.org wrote: -----
> 
>     Rashkae <rashkae at tigershaunt.com> writes:
>      > ... kicking sleeping
>      > homeless people to the head.
> 
>     Well la-de-da Mr. I-Got-High-Speed
> 
>      > (Rogers has dial-up?)
> 
>     Golden Triangle aka Execulink
> 
> 
> Now I understand your problem. You can't use any DSL provider since they 
> all resell Bell's services. Even the ones that don't still co-located in 
> the same COs.
> 
> One thing to watch is that developing neighbourhoods, if it financially 
> permits, get mini-COs to bring the DSLAM closer to your house.
> 
> My situation is not too far from yours. I've got sketchy DSL since my 
> move to an adjacent neighbourhood. It still works okay, it's just took a 
> modem change to make it acceptable.
> 
> My solution can be solved by going back to Rogers if I care to.
> 
> Your's on the other hand sounds like you have limited options. You can 
> consider a few things depending on your location:
> 
> 1. Terago (nee World without wire) offers 802.11 wireless service. Last 
> I heard they were still priced beyond residential rates.
> 2. Sympatico offers "unplugged" service, a WiMAX wireless offering.
> 3. There is satellite service in two varieties: 1 uses your existing 
> analog to make download requests (like web pages) and it sends the 
> downloads through the satellite signal. The other is actual bi-direction 
> satellite. This is also higher than residential rates, but it is less 
> than $100.
> 4. Fibreoptic. This is probably your most costly option, but man it's 
> fast and clean. At a $5k startup and $600/month it's likely beyond your 
> budget.
> 5. Dedicated T1 (hundreds in setup and hundreds per month.)
> 
> Then there are contractually prohibited options like sharing a 
> neighbours' Internet, if you have a neighbour far enough away to have 
> good service and close enough for a wifi signal.
> 
> I can only give first hand reports on fibre. I have a friend on 
> satellite (bi-dir) who finds latency too poor for SSH. I've seen 
> wireless service (not Wi FI or Max) that had lots of packet loss due to 
> collisions (It was a toronto market.)
> 
> Aside from WiMAX, it seems to me 512Kb looks like cheap bandwidth 
> compared to the options.