Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

42 Pages  1 2 3 > » Bottom

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

> Streamyx Is Planning Revising Fair Usage Policy, Do you agree or not ? Please Vote Now ? (Streamyx)

views
     
TSMX510
post Dec 18 2010, 12:40 AM, updated 10y ago

Love Me Sin Hate Me Sinner
*******
Senior Member
3,961 posts

Joined: Aug 2005
From: Earth



Latest Information Company who designed the FUP

Attached Image

Source http://bit.ly/qyuF3Q

Truly stated that their attention for the ISP to get

Additional bandwidth saving by ISP

Additional revenue for ISP Telco via additional charge from exceed data

This is recent meetup with blogger and twitteratis with @TMCorp they describe more about FUP

CODE
TM is committed to ensuring our customers receive the best broadband service at the most competitive price. To achieve this goal, we provide a contended broadband service. This means our Internet bandwidth (capacity) is catered to be shared by all our customers at any one point in time, to ensure we provide a satisfactory and acceptable performance on an equal basis to all our customers.

However, a small number of customers use more than their "fair share" of the Internet bandwidth provided by us. On average, about 10% of our customers are using a disproportionate amount of Internet bandwidth. These customers degrade the performance of our broadband service by taking bandwidth away from other customers, who use the service fairly.

For example, some customers use P2P or file sharing software, which constantly sends and receives videos and other types of very large files, throughout the day. These activities (download and upload continuously) use a lot of bandwidth and can significantly reduce the connection speed, which other customers are getting to access the Internet during peak hours. We don’t believe this is fair to the vast majority of our customers.

We wish to bring to your attention our traffic prioritization policy with regards to P2P and Fair Usage Policy. We would like to reiterate that the P2P throughput is subject to peers (seed) availability and their throughput as well.  Kindly note that TM does not have any control over peers’ availability or throughput.

The Fair Usage Policy automatically identifies the extremely heavy users and manages their bandwidth in order to protect the service of all our other customers. This traffic prioritization policy will protect the quality of service for the majority of our customers when they use the service, while at the same time, still allowing the extremely heavy users to continue to send and receive files with certain restrictions. With this policy in place, we will prioritize Internet activities like web browsing, live streaming, messaging applications and VOIP access while traffic to P2P sites will be given lower priority, due to the high bandwidth consumption of such services.

We wish to also highlight that as an Internet Service Provider (ISP), TM only provides access to the Internet and does not guarantee content delivery and performance where it is not within the domain of TM as an ISP. In fact, our international traffic management policy is designed to cater for all our customers so they have an optimal surfing experience within the normal limits of Internet usage.

As our priority is for all our customers to have a positive Internet experience, we wish to emphasize that it is important for all our customers to practice responsible usage of the allocated bandwidth based on normal usage.

We would like to reiterate that we are not against the use of P2P but we would like to educate our customers that the usage of excessive P2P does impact the overall service availability to our other customers.

TM does provide every customer with an allocated bandwidth, where other customers may use when not used by the others.  Unfortunately, the nature of P2P more often than not, takes more than their allocated bandwidth, thus causing undue setbacks for other users when they want to use the service.

As a responsible service provider, we believe it is our responsibility and commitment to educate and encourage responsible usage of the infrastructure we provide.


CR = Contention Ratio speed to international traffic being capped as low as 256kbps/ 512kbps

VL= Volumed Based pay more if u want to download more

Answer No = Keep the FUP as it is at the moment we signup for Streamyx


Your vote and comments will be presented to TM

I hope mod will pinned this thread


Screenshot of their slides

http://img405.imageshack.us/slideshow/webp...101218at326.png

*Credit to www.arsyan.com for the slides *

Source from www.qiilans87.com

Only 9 minutes of the event not the full event





A few quote from our forumer

QUOTE(Henshin @ Jan 5 2011, 05:19 PM)
So, according to those slides TM Net produced during its recent PR exercise, the company's definition of a heavy user is someone who downloads 25GB a month. This is laughable for all sorts of reasons.

If you were to use a 1Mbps Streamyx connection at full speed (let's say 100KB per second) for 24 hours a day for 30 days a month, you'd be able to download 247GB a month. TM Net doesn't want you to do this. TM Net expects you to use your 1Mbps broadband connection at 10KB/s on average every month. In other words, if you use more than 10% of your 1Mbps connection's total capacity a month, TM has now decided you're a heavy user.

(For 4Mbps Streamyx users, 25GB per month translates to 2.5% of total bandwidth capacity.)

To make this all the more insulting, TM Net's official page for its Streamyx site boasts "unlimited usage for a fixed rate". This is false advertising, of course, and it's by a communications company which is absolutely terrible at communications. There's no English dictionary in the world that defines "unlimited" as "having undisclosed limits." Prospective Streamyx subscribers would be less than impressed by the ugly truth: "Restricted to 25GB per month with an average speed of 10KB/s".

The second reason why TM Net's definition of heavy user is laughably absurd is the company has another broadband service, UniFi, and TM Net is allowing those users download 120GB per month (and as the UniFi official site notes there is no cap for the time being). Keep in mind that both UniFi and Streamyx users are using the same international bandwidth.

Don't be misled by TM Net's clumsy and transparent attempts to shift the blame from itself. Heavy users of Streamyx are not stealing bandwidth from other Streamyx users; the heavy users are simply making full use of their connections they paid for.

What's actually happening is TM Net is severely restricting Streamyx heavy users in order to maximise international bandwidth for UniFi users. In other words, TM Net is taking away international bandwidth from Streamyx users to cater to UniFi users. TM Net is doing this very quietly so the only ones who are noticing it now are the Streamyx heavy users.

Some of you may not consider TM Net's policies troubling because it doesn't currently affect you. Consider this: TM Net gets to decide who is a heavy downloader and under what circumstances. Download 120GB with a UniFi connection? TM Net says, "No problem." Download 25GB on a Streamyx connection and TM Net says you're a heavy user whose connection must be throttled so severely you won't be able to download critical data including OS service packs, security patches, application upgrades or anti-virus definition updates.

More to the point, TM Net also gets to decide what amount constitutes an excessively high download amount. Today, it's 25GB a month. In a year, TM Net could decide it's 20GB or perhaps 15GB. This is called moving the goalposts and to mix sporting metaphors, this is not cricket. TM Net, having gone from "unlimited" to 25GB, will most assuredly change this amount once again.

The real problem here is TM Net is set on maximising profits and as such is eager to increase its broadband subscription base without making the necessary infrastructure investments to maintain a high quality of service. Increasing  the number of subscribers means increasing revenue but increasing international bandwidth capacity to maintain quality of service means increasing expenditure which eats up profits.


This post has been edited by MX510: Sep 26 2011, 11:41 AM
zamans98
post Dec 18 2010, 12:46 AM

oquıɐɹ ǝɥ ɹǝo 'ǝɹǝɥǝɯos
*******
Senior Member
8,451 posts

Joined: Dec 2004
From: KayEL



kill those leeches.

if want fast speed, get FIBER !!
azerak
post Dec 18 2010, 12:48 AM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
795 posts

Joined: Sep 2007
can we have something like some sort of guarantee that the speed will be better if they implement this?
birain
post Dec 18 2010, 12:49 AM

良い一日を
******
Senior Member
1,448 posts

Joined: Apr 2007
tell them don't capped 512kbps, my speed already slow and got yoyo effect everyday. sweat.gif
takercena
post Dec 18 2010, 12:50 AM

Casual
***
Junior Member
327 posts

Joined: Mar 2006
I am going for Limited Bandwidth. However 60GB is too small for me sleep.gif. FUP need to be revised. However if it is possible, TM can create different package targeted at difference audience such as http://www.plus.net/support/broadband/spee...itisation.shtml
iipohbee
post Dec 18 2010, 12:52 AM

On my way
****
Senior Member
603 posts

Joined: Dec 2008
QUOTE(zamans98 @ Dec 18 2010, 12:46 AM)
kill those leeches.

if want fast speed, get FIBER !!
*
The unlimited fiber usage at this moment is consuming most of their bandwidth at this moment.

Admit it. They can't implement the volume cap with their Unifi users at this moment because it would be a 2nd blow to them as well people would steer away from subscribing Unifi fending off many potential subscribers.

Here's a 3rd solution:

Make your HSBB network neutral and allow other isps to come in.

requiem73
post Dec 18 2010, 12:53 AM

New Member
*
Junior Member
4 posts

Joined: Jan 2007


As long as there's a volume-based option for those of us who can afford it, I'm golden. Since we're going to be screwed either way, if I can afford to pay more to be screwed less violently, so be it.
birain
post Dec 18 2010, 12:54 AM

良い一日を
******
Senior Member
1,448 posts

Joined: Apr 2007
QUOTE(takercena @ Dec 18 2010, 12:50 AM)
I am going for Limited Bandwidth. However 60GB is too small for me sleep.gif. FUP need to be revised. However if it is possible, TM can create different package targeted at difference audience such as http://www.plus.net/support/broadband/spee...itisation.shtml
*
maybe the bandwidth limit should follow the HDD size like 120gb, 320gb, 500gb.
takercena
post Dec 18 2010, 12:55 AM

Casual
***
Junior Member
327 posts

Joined: Mar 2006
QUOTE(iipohbee @ Dec 18 2010, 12:52 AM)
The unlimited fiber usage at this moment is consuming most of their bandwidth at this moment.

Admit it. They can't implement the volume cap with their Unifi users at this moment because it would be a 2nd blow to them as well people would steer away from subscribing Unifi fending off many potential subscribers.

Here's a 3rd solution:

Make your HSBB network neutral and allow other isps to come in.
*
Too bad, this kind of suggestion is up to gov.


Added on December 18, 2010, 12:56 am
QUOTE(birain @ Dec 18 2010, 12:54 AM)
maybe the bandwidth limit should follow the HDD size like 120gb, 320gb, 500gb.
*
Yes, even I think it is sarcasm, I agreed with you. But I only spend 3 day at home per week so I don't think I can go for that smile.gif

This post has been edited by takercena: Dec 18 2010, 12:57 AM
khtan2000
post Dec 18 2010, 12:57 AM

Lurkerz
******
Senior Member
1,545 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Penang

dont really think they will leave this FUP out for good regardless what we say, when I signed my contract in 2004, dont even have this FUP crap in it, TM just change as they like.

I vote for limited bandwidth as like it or not FUP probably here to stay, as well ask TM to give a a real bandwidth number so we could manage our downloads with condition that no more throttle p2p or certain sites, no specific ip priority(like mine 60.xx nicest ping, 115cap, 118 uncap, 124 local cant even load sometimes). However the bandwidth must be a realistic value, not like 1 TB a month which beat the purpose of bandwidth limit which most probably TM will reject anyway, or only <60gB as we are already paying premium for such low speed.

100% no to contention ratio like what is happening now, everyone slowed to 256/384 indiscriminately. Even though my speedtest shows that I'm getting 1.5mbps for my 1mbps package, using monitoring software can see that the download speed varies also (like triangle shape, go to max rate then drop back 50KB, then back up)
takercena
post Dec 18 2010, 12:59 AM

Casual
***
Junior Member
327 posts

Joined: Mar 2006
QUOTE(khtan2000 @ Dec 18 2010, 12:57 AM)
dont really think they will leave this FUP out for good regardless what we say, when I signed my contract in 2004, dont even have this FUP crap in it, TM just change as they like.

I vote for limited bandwidth as like it or not FUP probably here to stay, as well ask TM to give a a real bandwidth number so we could manage our downloads with condition that no more throttle p2p or certain sites, no specific ip priority(like mine 60.xx nicest ping, 115cap, 118 uncap, 124 local cant even load sometimes). However the bandwidth must be a realistic value, not like 1 TB a month which beat the purpose of bandwidth limit which most probably TM will reject anyway, or only <60gB as we are already paying premium for such low speed.

100% no to contention ratio like what is happening now, everyone slowed to 256/384 indiscriminately. Even though my speedtest shows that I'm getting 1.5mbps for my 1mbps package, using monitoring software can see that the download speed varies also (like triangle shape, go to max rate then drop back 50KB, then back up)
*
Yes, the one that will agree with this is 512kbps users.

This post has been edited by takercena: Dec 18 2010, 12:59 AM
zamans98
post Dec 18 2010, 12:59 AM

oquıɐɹ ǝɥ ɹǝo 'ǝɹǝɥǝɯos
*******
Senior Member
8,451 posts

Joined: Dec 2004
From: KayEL



QUOTE(iipohbee @ Dec 18 2010, 12:52 AM)

Here's a 3rd solution:

Make your HSBB network neutral and allow other isps to come in.
*
allow MAXIS already ma...
takercena
post Dec 18 2010, 01:00 AM

Casual
***
Junior Member
327 posts

Joined: Mar 2006
QUOTE(zamans98 @ Dec 18 2010, 12:59 AM)
allow MAXIS already ma...
*
More specific, JARING or TIME and not MAXIS. tongue.gif
birain
post Dec 18 2010, 01:01 AM

良い一日を
******
Senior Member
1,448 posts

Joined: Apr 2007
i like the way before the experiment started. now every thing is turning into a mess.

This post has been edited by birain: Dec 18 2010, 01:01 AM
vapeace
post Dec 18 2010, 01:02 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
217 posts

Joined: Aug 2009


this is day light robbery by TM

Due to 10% why the remaining 90% have to bear with them ? Throttle those 10% and leave the 90% alone.. They paying for the same share of pie, just because someone eat more.. does not mean they have to share with the remaining ones. TM is being unreasonable in their FUP

throttle those 10% speed to 512Kbps, not the 90% ones. TM is expecting us to upgrade to Fiber. but fiber rollout is slow and wont even cover entire nation even in 10 years given the rate they are expending. Most user are ADSL due to limited option. Just because most user are ADSL user, TM wished to play god by doing anything they like to whoever they like. This is just unjust in any way possible. Do individual based bandwidth throttling not entire community based throttling.

it true that u have 4mbps speed but it does not mean that you can download over 1TB of data per month. This i have to agree. TM please give clear clarification on how you identify heavy and lite user ? Does mean if i go Youtube everyday i am automatically a heavy user ? Please clear and definite statement on what your perspective of heavy and lite user ?

TM, why are you so persistent in applying FUP on streamyx ADSL user but you still let UNIFI volume cap unlimited ? Arent you being unfair to all of use normal user ? You feed those hungry eater with buffet but you just serve a plate of fried rice to us ADSL user and we have to share the fry rice summore.
takercena
post Dec 18 2010, 01:03 AM

Casual
***
Junior Member
327 posts

Joined: Mar 2006
QUOTE(birain @ Dec 18 2010, 01:01 AM)
i like the way before the experiment started. now every thing is turning into a mess.
*
You mean before UNIFI start depleting all the bandwidth? Most streamyx users never exceed the limit, however TM doesn't want to admit this and put blame on Streamyx users, while UNIFI continue enjoying our sacrifices, with 5-20mbps uncapped in both upstream/downstream.

This post has been edited by takercena: Dec 18 2010, 01:11 AM
erokun
post Dec 18 2010, 01:03 AM

New Member
*
Junior Member
12 posts

Joined: Nov 2008
As a responsible service provider, I believe it is your responsibility and commitment to upgrade your service by upgrading infrastructure to support more bandwidth. flex.gif

FUP make no sense when it comes with 1, 2 and 4Mbps packages. If you want to make it fair. Put all user to 4Mbps with fee as low as 1 Mbps.

This post has been edited by erokun: Dec 18 2010, 01:06 AM
vapeace
post Dec 18 2010, 01:04 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
217 posts

Joined: Aug 2009


QUOTE(zamans98 @ Dec 18 2010, 01:59 AM)
allow MAXIS already ma...
*
it not allow maxis in to network, dont get the idea wrong

is like tm still sell unifi but under maxis name
it almost like rebadge but in internet package

based on the sales, maybe 20% might go to Maxis pocket but 80% still masuk TM pocket. Rebadge is what Malaysian company are good at !
birain
post Dec 18 2010, 01:04 AM

良い一日を
******
Senior Member
1,448 posts

Joined: Apr 2007
QUOTE(takercena @ Dec 18 2010, 12:59 AM)
Yes, the one that will agree with this is 512kbps users.
*
agree about? btw, i'm on 512 line.
jimfoa
post Dec 18 2010, 01:05 AM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Sep 2010
QUOTE(vapeace @ Dec 18 2010, 01:02 AM)
this is day light robbery by TM

Due to 10% why the remaining 90% have to bear with them ? Throttle those 10% and leave the 90% alone.. They paying for the same share of pie, just because someone eat more.. does not mean they have to share with the remaining ones. TM is being unreasonable in their FUP

throttle those 10% speed to 512Kbps, not the 90% ones. TM is expecting us to upgrade to Fiber. but fiber rollout is slow and wont even cover entire nation even in 10 years given the rate they are expending. Most user are ADSL due to limited option. Just because most user are ADSL user, TM wished to play god by doing anything they like to whoever they like. This is just unjust in any way possible. Do individual based bandwidth throttling not entire community based throttling.

it true that u have 4mbps speed but it does not mean that you can download over 1TB of data per month. This i have to agree. TM please give clear clarification on how you identify heavy and lite user ? Does mean if i go Youtube everyday i am automatically a heavy user ? Please clear and definite statement on what your perspective of heavy and lite user ?

TM, why are you so persistent in applying FUP on streamyx ADSL user but you still let UNIFI volume cap unlimited ? Arent you being unfair to all of use normal user ? You feed those hungry eater with buffet but you just serve a plate of fried rice to us ADSL user and we have to share the fry rice summore.
*
+1

42 Pages  1 2 3 > » Top
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0600sec    0.71    7 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 30th July 2021 - 09:30 PM