|
infernal machines posted:Probably the service availability database provided by your telecom company. Or they (the incumbent) have older equipment in the CO's and they don't feel like upgrading...
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 00:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 20:27 |
|
|
w00tmonger posted:Any spill over on the horizon from the states FCC classification ruling? No, because we always classified ISPs as common carriers, and have in fact had net neutrality regulations since 2009.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 00:04
|
|
|
Rogers and Bell would like to ban VPNs because AMERICAN NETFLIX
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
Good luck with that. Hahaha.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
I bet that guy uses a VPN to work from home.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 22:42
|
|
|
It's so insulting that he's complaining about not having a viable business while they continue to make record profits year after year.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 16:38
|
|
|
Too many businesses use VPNs. There is no way they would be allowed to ban them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2015 00:50
|
|
|
Matt18001 posted:Too many businesses use VPNs. There is no way they would be allowed to ban them. You're not thinking evil enough. 3rd party VPNs legislated away, only VPNs run by the service provider allowed. With government backdoors for national security.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2015 01:07
|
|
|
Ban everything but ROGERS® Reliable™ VPN service. 1gb encrypted transport, introductory rate of $49 for the first 6 months.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
When people switched to encrypted torrents to evade packet inspection, Rogers took a hammer to their network and deprioritized all encrypted traffic. Every time I had to remote into work on our VPN it was like pulling teeth. They really are a bunch of idiots.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2015 06:05
|
|
|
Chris Knight posted:When people switched to encrypted torrents to evade packet inspection, Rogers took a hammer to their network and deprioritized all encrypted traffic. Every time I had to remote into work on our VPN it was like pulling teeth. I think the highlight of their incompetence is when they broke World Of Warcraft with their traffic shaping, leading to a letter from the CRTC basically saying "what the hell." http://bit.ly/1AunlZf
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2015 08:05
|
|
|
less than three posted:I think the highlight of their incompetence is when they broke World Of Warcraft with their traffic shaping, leading to a letter from the CRTC basically saying "what the hell." http://bit.ly/1AunlZf The Rogers network fuckery during this period was amazing. You could start an encrypted torrent or VPN connection and there was a 50% chance that action was going to poo poo all over any attempt to use the internet at all. Speeds throttled to 80kb/s, DNS timeouts, and the inability to hit anything over SSL were just some of the many things that would kick in once you angered the Rogers network management robots.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2015 08:17
|
|
|
I remember measuring my World of Warcraft bandwidth usage about 5 years ago. I was topping out at around 50Mb per hour with a third party VOIP client running. There is no way they could claim that was accidentally filtered the data profile isn't remotely similar to a torrent.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2015 16:59
|
|
|
Shaw quietly launched Internet 120 120mbps down 6mbps up 750gb cap 120 dollars a month.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 04:25
|
|
|
DariusLikewise posted:6mbps up  Is it too much to ask to have a symmetrical connection? I don't need more than 10-20Mbps down, but this 1.5Mbps up that comes with it is making me dread any asset change when working remotely.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 05:31
|
|
|
Jan posted:
Docsis is designed for higher customer download speeds than uploads, unfortunately. Generally the higher speed tiers have a greater upload just to accommodate all the ACKs you'll be sending out when downloading at 150+Mbps. Some DSL providers do 25/10 (or more), but you're much more at the mercy of bad phone lines and your distance from their equipment to actually get the advertised speeds. I wouldn't be surprised if we still get lovely speeds and bandwidth caps on fibre connections from the incumbents, though. Hopefully the CRTC will open them up to TPIAs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 06:33
|
|
|
I cancelled VMedia a while ago. Was supposed to cut off on the 1st. It still works, my credit card hasn't been charged, and my account says I have no services with them. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 07:17
|
|
|
Rukus posted:Docsis is designed for higher customer download speeds than uploads, unfortunately. DOCSIS may specify lower maximum upload channels, but it's entirely the ISP's prerogative to bind more of them, which they obviously aren't doing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 15:33
|
|
|
DariusLikewise posted:Shaw quietly launched Internet 120 At least a 750gb cap is reasonable, even with fairly heavy downloading.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 17:20
|
|
|
slidebite posted:At least a 750gb cap is reasonable, even with fairly heavy downloading. Just seems riduclous considering their grandfathered Broadband 100 plan was only 99 dollars after price hike and Broadband 250 where available is still 120 a month for 250/10(or 5 depending on area if I remember) and 1TB. Rukus posted:Docsis is designed for higher customer download speeds than uploads, unfortunately. Generally the higher speed tiers have a greater upload just to accommodate all the ACKs you'll be sending out when downloading at 150+Mbps. Some DSL providers do 25/10 (or more), but you're much more at the mercy of bad phone lines and your distance from their equipment to actually get the advertised speeds. I wouldn't be surprised if we still get lovely speeds and bandwidth caps on fibre connections from the incumbents, though. Hopefully the CRTC will open them up to TPIAs. MTS is installing fibre in small communities where it doesn't make any sense to upgrade the existing copper. I believe the pricing is 50/5 - $83 100/15 - $140 250/30 - $280 I'm under the assumption that once fibre is in that the jump from 50 down to 250 down isn't really taxing on the network so the prices don't really make much sense to me. DariusLikewise fucked around with this message at 17:40 on Mar 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
Introducing "new"  internet plans is the cartel's equivalent of saying, "What are you talking about? We have always been at war with Eurasia."
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 17:40
|
|
|
I dunno, the new Rogers plan is 250/20 with unlimited usage and $95 a month after the first three months. Maybe It sucks by international standards but that seems pretty good from where I'm sitting.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
Evis posted:I dunno, the new Rogers plan is 250/20 with unlimited usage and $95 a month after the first three months. Maybe It sucks by international standards but that seems pretty good from where I'm sitting. FFS. That's less than I'm paying for 150/15 with Teksavvy and it has a better cap.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:FFS. That's less than I'm paying for 150/15 with Teksavvy and it has a better cap. This is exactly what the incumbents are hoping for with their CBB pricing, price TPIA's right out of business 
John Capslocke fucked around with this message at 23:10 on Mar 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 23:05
|
|
|
37th Chamber posted:This is exactly what the incumbents are hoping for with their CBB pricing, price TPIA's right out of business I'm sure it'll work too. Maybe if Teksavvy's service and customer experience hadn't gone to poo poo over the last five years I'd consider sticking with them, as it is there's no meaningful differentiators between them and the incumbents. They just cost more.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
Yeah, the CRTC is really dragging their feet on this. The wholesale rates are clearly absurd if Rogers can easily outprice TPIA's like this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 05:05
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:I'm sure it'll work too. Maybe if Teksavvy's service and customer experience hadn't gone to poo poo over the last five years I'd consider sticking with them, as it is there's no meaningful differentiators between them and the incumbents. They just cost more. I have only had to interact with Teksavvys customer service a couple of times, but both times they were phenomenal.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 07:32
|
|
|
I only ever talk to Teksavvy support through DSLreports' direct forum and I generally get quick and prompt service. Also, for Christmas we bought my in laws a TV and a Roku and switched them over to an unlimited account because of Netflix. The support agent emailed them back asking if they were sure they wanted to upgrade because they only used a few gigs per month. It was nice to actually have honest advice from a corporation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 15:21
|
|
|
slidebite posted:I have only had to interact with Teksavvys customer service a couple of times, but both times they were phenomenal. I have contacted them semi-regularly over the last eight or so years as I've used them for both personal internet access and for a number of my client's businesses. Wait times have increased while the quality and level of service has decreased. They now insist that you jump through all the same pointless hoops as the incumbents before actually beginning to troubleshoot your issue, issues often require multiple calls to resolve, and you get the added bonus of them not being able to actually dispatch techs themselves. The number of times I've waited on an issue to be "escalated" so that someone would actually resolve it is just ridiculous. And not being able to get proper after hours support for issues on business services because the business support people have all gone for the day is a beautiful touch too. As long as I don't have to deal with them they're fine, except now they're also more expensive then the incumbents for slower service.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 17:10
|
|
|
I'll agree the phone agents are dumb as bricks, but the TSI staff that hang out on DSLReports are pretty stellar. But to address this:infernal machines posted:They now insist that you jump through all the same pointless hoops as the incumbents before actually beginning to troubleshoot your issue That's because that laundry list is REQUIRED by the incumbents before they will even accept a ticket from a TPIA. Don't have all your i's dotted and t's crossed? Get hosed, ticket rejected. It's not unique to Teksavvy at all sadly. John Capslocke fucked around with this message at 18:55 on Mar 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
37th Chamber posted:I'll agree the phone agents are dumb as bricks, but the TSI staff that hang out on DSLReports are pretty stellar. But to address this: This. I used to work phone tech support for a large cable company and if you tried to escalate something without doing the basic 9-10 troubleshooting steps you would get rejected everytime.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
37th Chamber posted:That's because that laundry list is REQUIRED by the incumbents before they will even accept a ticket from a TPIA. Don't have all your i's dotted and t's crossed? Get hosed, ticket rejected. It's not unique to Teksavvy at all sadly. Yes, this is a problem, but it doesn't need to be my problem. It's like every other thing they blame on the incumbents from missed service visits, to botched installs, to major network fixes that take literal weeks to resolve, if they have so little control over their own business then why am I using them? They used to offer a service that basically worked, and was cheaper and better than you could get elsewhere. That isn't the case anymore.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:Yes, this is a problem, but it doesn't need to be my problem. It's like every other thing they blame on the incumbents from missed service visits, to botched installs, to major network fixes that take literal weeks to resolve, if they have so little control over their own business then why am I using them? Praise be Oligopoly Oligopoly our Lord
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:Yes, this is a problem, but it doesn't need to be my problem. It's like every other thing they blame on the incumbents from missed service visits, to botched installs, to major network fixes that take literal weeks to resolve, if they have so little control over their own business then why am I using them? Because at least then you're giving some money to a company that is struggling against that bullshit instead of giving all of your money to the ones responsible for it?
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
I don't have any tech support issues like that with Start.ca. I used to work NOC at UUNet way back and most of the people I've chatted with at Start are very competent and well trained. I've had one CSR where I was pointing out a routing problem and he corrected me which was some humble pie. They also automate much of the ticket related bullshit for you, actually do follow up calls and go out of their way to ensure you get referral credits. Great company.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
slidebite posted:I have only had to interact with Teksavvys customer service a couple of times, but both times they were phenomenal. Yep, same here. My connection kept dropping, but only for a few seconds at a time. After a couple days I got sick of it, sent a tweet to their Twitter support thingy, 5 minutes later a guy calls, troubleshoots the problem, fixes it, everything good as new. The entire episode lasted less than 20 minutes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
It really doesn't matter what kind of verbal poo poo you're trying to heap onto Teksavvy for your entitlement, we'd all still rather talk to their customer service than the alternatives.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:They used to offer a service that basically worked, and was cheaper and better than you could get elsewhere. That isn't the case anymore. It still beats directly giving money to Robelus. e: Basically, citing a TPIA's diminishing customer service and/or increasing costs as sufficient grounds to switch back to the incumbents is handing the latter a victory. They are doing everything in their power to hobble TPIAs, anyone following this thread should know better than to cave in to their methods. Jan fucked around with this message at 22:15 on Mar 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 20:27 |
|
|
infernal machines posted:Yes, this is a problem, but it doesn't need to be my problem. It's like every other thing they blame on the incumbents from missed service visits, to botched installs, to major network fixes that take literal weeks to resolve, if they have so little control over their own business then why am I using them? Its only as good and reliable as the incumbents allow it to be.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 22:13
|
|
