ICASA Complaint: Your feedback needed

[rpm]

Hi folks

I have just heard from Dianne from ICASA and again your help will be appreciated with the preparation of another document. There are some misunderstanding regarding the cap issue…I think ICASA mistakes the cap for port prioritization. If you can answer any of the questions (please take the issue of the cap as port prioritization) please post it here. It is quite urgent as we are working with tight deadlines…

From ICASA:

“The meeting took place as promised. I have been asked to come up with a discussion document which will go out for comment in preperation for the hearing. I need urgently from you. Some points to be included in this, The advert that was used by Telkom to attract initial subscribers ( the one without the capp) Information of when the capp was introduced. Impact of the capping on people who had subscribed for the service without the capp. Is it possible for internet service providers to provide the service or is it only in Telkom's domain WHY? I am aware that SENTECH also provides the service. What makes the provision different ? why is it not capped? What makes it wireless?”


RPM
rpm@myadsl.co.za

[Myrrdin]

Hi rpm.

Some thoughts.

1. Port prioritization.

First of all you would have to establish the validity of port prioritization. Except for a few very novice users the effectiveness of port prioritization could be easily bypassed as many of the current software gives you the freedom of changing the port you use. So instead of hampering for eg P2P networks all you are doing is forcing the users of these software to specify unprioritized ports for eg port 80 which is the port used by default for http by browsers. Therefore the argument of giving equal experience to users does not fly as now http has to compete with P2P across the only unprioritized port reducing everyone's experience, leaving the port usually reserved for P2P under utilized. You cannot distinguish P2P packets from http packets so once all traffic is going via port 80 port prioritization is ineffectual. So people who signed up unprioritized are competing with P2P networks across http ports for bandwidth.

Impact of port prioritization on gaming - Internet games have to transport as much vital information and only vital information in the shortest possible time to enable enjoyment of the entertainment. Games are not as pliable as P2P software regarding ports. I play Delta Force : Black Hawk Down on a regular basis and although in a 5 hour session I NEVER transmit/receive more than 40 megs of data, because of port prioritization my experience is reduced because port prioritization creates imaginary lag as it chops up my data packets to suppress throughput. So without port prioritization I would get more enjoyment out of my games without impacting the network at all as my 40 mb per 5 hours will stay unchanged, only my response will be quicker. For example, my other clan members are on 128k ISDN lines they have overall better pings than me, 200-300ms vs me in the 400-600ms pings.

2. ISP
I will leave this one for you as I am sure you have enough information about why bandwidth is not a line operator issue but an ISP issue and thus the ISP's becomes only a reseller of a Telkom product.

3. What makes the provision different? Essential the method of delivery as both promote/sell broadband solutions.

4. why is it not capped? Because the whole capping issue is an invalid issue Telkom is using as an excuse. If you look at the rest of the world and here I include africa, if there are caps they are in the 1gb per day range. Also here ADSL can extent beyond 512k, why dont we see these packages.

5. What makes it wireless? OMG but never mind. The last mile between client and service provider does not travel by copper wire, but through radio waves.

Just some thoughts, use them, dont use them. But please keep us informed.

Of course I don't look busy.....I did it right the first time.

[lewstherin]

RPM you need to make triple sure that you get ICASA on the same page with us when dealing with the different issues. If ICASA publishes something which misnomers port prioritorisation as capping etc, we're screwed.

<font color="blue">Telkom needs a leash, ICASA needs some guts, and the </font id="blue"><font color="red">SA consumer</font id="red"><font color="blue"> needs to make it happen</font id="blue">

[lewstherin]

Myrrdin's right, one can tunnel p2p etc through http.
As to the impact of port priority:
ICASA needs to realise that many applications now use non-http ports - realtime trading apps, games, news tickers, weather tickers, some software update services, some chat services and so on. If we could compile a list of non-p2p apps that are affected by port-prioritorisation it would add weight to our claims that Telkom is restricting internet usage for everyone not just p2p downloaders.
Also port prioritorisation MUST be something ISPs should be able to implement, Telkom is constricting ISPs into becoming mere resellers (to the benefit of TelkomInternet). Whilst other ISPs can provide ADSL services, they are not allowed any control over how to implement their service - Telkom mandates the cap, the ports, the routes - which violates the ISPs ability to differentiate their service beyond their valued adds (email etc).

<font color="blue">Telkom needs a leash, ICASA needs some guts, and the </font id="blue"><font color="red">SA consumer</font id="red"><font color="blue"> needs to make it happen</font id="blue">

[Myrrdin]

And....

VPN ports are being prioritized. I know this might be the wrong way of looking at it, but it is my viewpoint. VPN is being prioritized because the 3GB cap and then unlimited local is forcing people to come up with solutions to bypass the 3GB cap. So in effect if you set up a VPN to a local server you have uncapped ADSL as local is uncapped. By prioritizing the VPN port Telkom is trying to suppress places like Nocap/Decap and ODS. That would also be the reason that the new 4GB package drops you completely when you reach your cap. For people who want to use VPN for telecommuting it becomes impossible due to port prioritization. The new 4gb solution is unacceptable as I cannot take the risk of working from home because I cannot tell my boss that I wont work the last week in the month because I am capped.


Of course I don't look busy.....I did it right the first time.

[kaspaas]

Network Time Protocol (NTP) is important as well.

It is used to set server (and PC- workstation) clock accurately.

Port 123 I believe.

This is a realtime, extremely low bandwidth service, for which delays should be minimised.



South Africa needs World Class Broadband at World Competitive Prices.

[Andre]

At least saix have some time servers:

Pinging igubu.saix.net [196.25.1.1] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 196.25.1.1: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=251
Reply from 196.25.1.1: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=251
Reply from 196.25.1.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=251
Reply from 196.25.1.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=251

Ping statistics for 196.25.1.1:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 10ms, Maximum = 20ms, Average = 15ms

Back to the topic, I find it disturbing that ICASA needs those points explained to them. Its like they have no clue of what is going on.

[doekvoet]

One issue about the capping which should also be included, is that Telkom unilaterally changed the capping measure on 1 August 2003, from a 3 Gig cap comprising of up or download (whichever was reached first) to a cap of the combined total of up and downloads.

[Karnaugh]

Uuuuuhh

You really should not bring P2P software into this! Most ISP's arround the world as requested by governments and recording companies are working to shut down P2P. DONT GO THERE!

- Colin Alston
colin at alston dot za dot org

"Getting traffic shaping right is easy and can be summed up in one word: Dont." -- George Barnett

[BTTB]

Well I think the one thing that really gets to people is the fact that the Capped Speeds are <b>unusable</b>. The speeds are so bad that one could compare it to the initial days of the internet with 14 or 33kb modems on a noisy phone line. So updating Anti Virus Definitions or merely browsing a international website is virtually impossible. ICASA cannot and should not accept any excuses from Telkom on this point. If a service is unusable, even if it is slower than a 33kb modem on its worst day, it basically is still unusable and that’s the bottom line. We don’t have the time to wait for data to trickle in or time out and ICASA should seriously amend their thinking along these lines. Time is money. And a service that is already overpriced and extremely limited by all measures shouldn’t be throttled after 3 gigs of usage to the extent that a user must sit and do the World Wide Wait. We all thought that those days were over and left 56k and ISDN, because we had all read and heard about how quick ADSL is overseas. We were so let down and I and many others who invested in ADSL because we know what it's capable of have wasted our hard earned money for a "Always On Telkom Disgrace".

<b><hr noshade size="1"></b><font size="2"><font color="red"><b>You can take Telkom out of the Post Office but you can't take the Post Office out of Telkom.</b></font id="red"></font id="size2">

[Tharaxis]

Haha, slower than a 33.6 on a bad day? I moved from a 33.6 to ADSL, try slower than a 33.6 on a bloody brilliant day when capped.

I could at least use the internet (albeit slowly) at all times with a 33.6, when capped my international doesn't work at all (and by "at all" I mean "in a usable fashion").

[BTTB]

Hehe, yeah thats the point I was trying to make. Thanks.[:p]

<b><hr noshade size="1"></b><font size="2"><font color="red"><b>You can take Telkom out of the Post Office but you can't take the Post Office out of Telkom.</b></font id="red"></font id="size2">

[Andre]

It may be worth hammering the point that Sentech offers uncapped service.

In my opinion the question should be why is the Telkom service capped, not why is Sentech uncapped.

Port shaping was not mentioned anywhere in Telkom's literature when I signed up. Telkom have degraded ADSL service while actually putting the price up.

[BTTB]

“Less product” (bandwidth) for more money so to speak.
This is crucial to the whole saga as without bandwidth the product is unusable. So in essence what Sentech is offering could theoretically be priced much higher than Telkom's ADSL, but for a 128k it is in actual fact cheaper and a 256k it is the same. Only the 512 is more expensive, but then again your usage is uncapped so the whole argument goes full circle again to "bandwidth" and the price thereof.


<b><hr noshade size="1"></b><font size="2"><font color="red"><b>You can take Telkom out of the Post Office but you can't take the Post Office out of Telkom.</b></font id="red"></font id="size2">

[caroper]

Is it worth pointing out that the new unshaped package is effectively what early adopters were getting, but is now 4 times the price?
Effectively Telkom have once again bypassed ICASA and implemented an enormous tariff increase. If I am correct, Telkom are supposed to apply to ICASA for permission to increase tariffs, and as such all this maneuvering by Telkom is just to avoid ICASA and treat them as fools.

Cheers
Chris