Again, i have been ignored.

I've ask, what kind of traffic does TM take into account for their VB? LB? FUP? Local included or International only?

If local included... it's a very big nono.
If i've not mistaken youtube, blogspot and google (all those belong to google) have servers in malaysia.
I believe the Microsoft has a server locally also for their windows update.
If they are going to take into account traffic sent and received locally... this VB is a big no.

If international traffic only, then i think it would be okay.

BUT, my question is, what is the point of this? Are they thinking that those heavy users will be afraid of RM2 per GB, and forego their downloading activities? Thus, reducing network congestion? What if they don't?

Also, remember that UniFi network is expanding, this will work for a while. But by end of next year or so i guarantee you, it will be back to square 1.

I think it's better if TM will show, what will the effect of this VB and FUP bring.
Example,
now the International Gateway is at 90% capacity 100% of the time.
after FUP and VB, the forecasted capacity of the IG will be at 70%capacity 100% of the time... etc...
then at the current rate of expansion of users, it will go back to 90% capacity in... X months time.
after that?

Pay as you use beyond cap, or throttle heavily once reach cap?

Both have pros and cons. The way TM has presented it, i'm not 100% sure which is better at the moment.

I would agree to any options if it was carry out fairly and transparent.

1. Fair Usage Policy
- as inside the TM announcement "The Fair Usage Policy automatically identifies the extremely heavy users and manages their bandwidth...". How much is consider a heavy user. It would better for us to manage our usage if we would understand the "extremely heavy users" therm mean.
- Difference Fair Usage Policy should be apply for difference packages. Example if I was a 4Mbps user and the Fair Usage Policy cap me at 300Kbps which happen only recently before TM lifted the Fair Usage Policy was totally unreasonable. If 4Mbps users was cap at 300Kbps then it's better that they just apply for 512Kpbs packages which is much cheaper.
- The Fair Usage Policy would need to be "BUG" free. What happen on the last attempt TM applying the Fair Usage Policy cause our connection to a point of chaos. Not only browsing speed slow down but other task that take less then 32KB connection also effected (VOIP, SSH, Remote Access etc) because of the high latency issue. This "BUG" cause the Fair Usage Policy that was suppose to "priorities Internet activities like web browsing, live streaming, messaging applications and VOIP access" (as stated in the announcement) totally going the wrong way.

2. Volume Base Pay as 1GB RM2
- If this would be apply then it shouldn't have have packages like 384Kbps, 512Kbps, 1Mbps, 4Mbps. Everyone should have the same speed because of the volume (bandwidth or data) cap. Imaging that someone who apply a slow 384Kbps line that wish to download a big files (30GB) with such a slow connection speed yet he still pay the same money for the same bandwidth.
- No more Fair Usage Policy where certain traffic was slowed down like P2P (I am not a P2P user anymore) because we pay for the bandwidth we consume.
- Every one should have the same priority doesn't matter he or she is a Home user or SOHO / BIZ.
- A website for user to monitor their bandwidth usage.
- A protection in the packages if it's going to be a PAYU (Pay As You Use) where it should have a monthly cap on the maximum payable charges. Like what been apply for mobile data provider to their customer. Even your bill reach RM800 but you only need to pay the maximum RM250. This would protect those users who was unaware of their Internet usage. Example is a father that apply an Internet for their children but unaware of the usage.

3. Limited Bandwidth (60GB per month)
- Difference bandwidth limit for difference packages. Example like 384Kbps (60GB), 512Kbps (120GB), 1Mbps (240GB), 4Mnps (480GB) and so on for unifi.
- It must be a monthly basis and not daily (2GB a day). As if I doesn't use the Internet in a week then I would still have my 60GB bandwidth for the next week and not losing the ( 7 days x 2GB = 14GB) especially when there was connection down time (phone line been stolen or something).
- No more Fair Usage Policy where certain traffic was slowed down like P2P (I am not a P2P user anymore) because we have our limited bandwidth.
- A website for user to monitor their bandwidth usage.
- Speed been slow down after reaching bandwidth limit and not totally unaccessible to Internet.
- Plan for users to buy additional bandwidth.

Finally I would like to express that TM should consider everything clearly and with open minded (more transparent on the future packages / plan) as Malaysia largest Internet service provider. A lot of us (TM users) which have come along when Streamyx started to be available in Malaysia pass 5 years above. We have been using TM service as there were no other choice (land line service) in out area. If there would have competition (don't count wireless service as they was just alternative) then we could have chosen other service provider that give better offer but there just aren't. So whatever decision that TM make will effect all of us (TM users) that doesn't have other choice.

Thanks if any TM officer would read my long post.

I go for monthly limit.

50GB is plenty to go for most people.

You're already getting 10X of what the mobile broadband users are getting or even more when they can live with a 3GB or less quota.

Now the question is can TM maintain a good quality service once this is implemented?

Those who are currently on 4mbps plan you should stay and not downgrade/upgrade your packages because your previous contract did not have this VL clauses.

---

Added on December 19, 2010, 12:18 pm

This has been my question for a while now. Everyone was sort-of getting along prior to the capping fiasco. And everyone is sort-of getting along now. There does not seem to be much complaints at all abut slowdown nowadays. So why the change? Does it not seem that there is some hidden agenda behind all this?

Sure, its sounds like a conspiracy theory as we have no proof. But now that they liften / relaxed the capping, how many users are still having major problems? Apart from the occasional ones, vs the complaints in the other thread like every 5 mins.

So if we are setting up an online petition would it help ?

This does happened to m2u when they want to charge their m2u online banking few years ago and they back it off :-)

Just an analogy :-)

Hi myandylai,

Just a few things to add to each suggestion.They sound good, hope you don't mind if I add some additional comments.
Agree with the slowdown as this would frustrate their subscribers further. This from experience of using mobile broadband. People don't like to have their line slowdown halfway in the middle of the month should they require extra volume during that time and suffer a slowdown which would affect their web experience.For many, they would want the option to temporarily increase their quota or buy extra volume usage to avoid it.

The monthly cap credit limit should be set to something higher because this wouldn't deter those who abuse the line with 1TB downloads.They would not feel threatened to do away with their bad habits since what is RM250 for 1TB of data?
Yes is different because it's based on prepaid model. Meaning if you use up your credit your line gets cut immediately until you re-top up your account.
It is only when they see a bill of RM2000 that they will reconsider and value bandwidth resources.
Also there must be a minimum commitment in place for TM to continue having a stable flow of revenue to cover their line rental and fixed call revenue. Maybe a fixed RM50 commitment to break even?

This is the 2nd best option to option (2) as it is a one way advantage to TM.It will not benefit the subscribers because you will not be able to carry forward your unused bandwidth to the following month if you cannot utilize all of it. Indirectly it'll encourage people to use up more so that they won't waste it. Just like you go and order a meal outside and you have no choice if the plate comes in large proportion. Would you want to waste it?
Isn't it good if you can order your food according to how much you can eat? This would be unfair to those who utilize less volume and as I said, it only benefit TM totally.

What TM is looking here is to free up some of their bandwidth to make way for more subscribers intake.They want to expand their subscriber base for more $$.

lol la.... what tinkering needed now

i think the solution is ez

cap ONLY extreme downloader... why bring down ALL instead of SOME?

Just like you speeding in highway u got summon.... so the summon here is capped speed after extreme amount of data downloaded = =

Dunno how to control the 1% leh?

Now should be the number game... what limit should we go... 100Gb? 200Gb?

Seriously.... common sense la... these EXTREME downloader who make your network sakit... why give UBAT to ALL?

Don't you think the Doc here (TM Net) is the sicko?

I think if you just look around these forums, you can already find a handful who have said they download a large amount. There was a post a few days back somewhere where someone said a friend of his downloads 24/7 just because he can, as he pays for it, so he might as well use it fully. Whether it is necessary or not is not the question.

This is nothing to do with VPN, P2P etc etc. Everything has legit uses. So nothing should be targetted or blocked. Just focus on the highest hoggers from top down. The problem will then resolve itself for the majority of others (including light weight hoggers).

This is something that I've been trying to find evidence about. It's hard getting info from the ground as I don't understand their native language and don't know what their local equivalent of lowyat.net is.

Do not buy any of their rubbish. After FUP, you will get cable faults + maintenance downtime along with your FUP. If they want USERS to be good, they can first set a good example by providing REASONABLE and GOOD service. Of course they aren't and they won't and actually nothing we say will change anything. But 1 thing that we should never accept is their brainwash.

Its easy to say , I was like you about it but when I saw how complex their network system is , its pretty hard to implement on case-by-case basis. Anyhow the question needs to be address is getting decent speed and hopefully getting more folks to have a server here in Malaysia , so its a win-win for all
For those who are trying to be tech savvy or lawyer wannabies

Regarding unlimited , it clearly stated that its for time usage and TM has the rights to change Terms of Service anytime when you signed the contract - meaning that if the contract has been changed , the old one is null and void and you have to comply with the new one

The main question is tackling the whole excessive data usage. If you want to demonstrate , try getting your friends to download stuff from Xunlei and you try to surf. You'll face the same problem or do this , go and hog Starbucks bandwidth by downloading and p2ping and notice how other people get frustrated. There must be a solution for all of this , sadly our society  needs education
Lets just give TM a chance , when i was there at the bloggers event , its good to see top-level people there as well , you have the GCEO and a lot of other people and they know whats going on and they are telling their plans and getting opinions.

Lastly to conclude ,like it or not some form of FUP is going to be implemented. The same thing applies to business as well. We should look at the next thing , now if this FUP is implemented , would it going to solve the issues faced by a lot of us ?


Now TM will simply say well its because of bandwidth hoggers currently , and like I said a number of times , you and I would be blamed. Lets give TM a chance , let them do this and from there we shall judge

I disagree with pay once you've exceeded , unless TM comes with some option saying

Would like to surf in slower speed or buy more bandwidth to resume back your normal speed

Huh? What does that mean? English not good here.

I thought choosing NO is like objection to FUP?

Voted Null  Afraid voted wrongly.

What is policy revising? hmm... correct the policy? Reuse the policy?