@webdesignempire

I really appreciate the fact that you're taking the time to address the issue of horrible 1mbps broadband and above which people here have been ranting about for ages. I was recently cut off from broadband internet access for about a week and had to keep calling TMnet's call centre every single day before they decided to send a team of technicians to my house.

Anyway, it looks like you've covered a whole lot of issues but here are some I can add to the list ..

1) After my DSL link was cut off for a week and then restored, I was also reassigned and have since then been locked into the 218.111.x.x IP range. I'm a 4mbps user and have since been experiencing noticeably faster speeds on international connections (30-40KB/s per HTTP thread) using this range as opposed to the usual 5-10KB/s. About a week ago, the speed and latency were dependant on which IP range I was on but they seem to have given 4mbps users some sort of priority. I don't think this is fair as all paying customers should get the same speeds with international sites regardless of which package they are on, limited only by their package downstream speed and the achievable downstream rate. There must also be consistency of service quality between each dynamic IP range one is assigned to.

2) It is a known fact that TM practices traffic shaping for various types of P2P traffic. It's been this way for 3 years+ and I'd rather let that be a known fact when you apply for their service rather than finding that out by yourself via forums such as this one. I'm not a genius but one would assume that shaping large amounts of P2P traffic in a large network would slow things down a lot or form a bottleneck of sorts. Furthermore, I'm pretty sure that the majority of heavy P2P downloaders are more than willing to purchase various P2P-throttle bypassing services to get past these bandwidth caps which in turn renders these blocks useless. A ton of P2P services have cropped up in the LYN forum solely because TMnet has chosen to blacklist P2P traffic in an attempt to conserve bandwidth.

How do they intend to cap these downloaders which are now piggybacking P2P traffic from centralised servers on the SFTP/HTTP/FTP protocols? Are they going to shape those protocols too? Wouldn't a more viable solution be to set transfer limits..?

Please ask them how they intend to solve these problems, thanks