Bandwidth Carry-over??

[Quazzi]

Something I was thinking about - your thoughts please.

The way I see it, we're all paying for 3GB of international bandwidth. As soon as we hit it, we're capped (more like disconnected). Why is it then that we don't have bandwidth carry-over if we don't hit our cap. For example, say I only use 2Gig this month. Then its only fair that the extra gig I didn't use be carried over to next month's quota. [?][?][?][B)][?][?][?] just thought I'd add in the smilies coz i've never used them b4 [)]

 

[VQuest]

I agree, left over bandwidth should be carried over to the next month, afterall, we're paying for it. This point should be brought up with Telkom as well.


----------------
United we stand!
----------------

 

[rpm]

Hi guys

I was thinking about the exact same thing. If they ‘punish’ power users, they should also reward guys that do not use their full 3 Gig. I will definitely make this point in possible negotiations. It is easy to implement and is fair.

Regards,

RPM
[email protected]

 

[microfast]

If there were a carry over of under-usage then there will be a carry over of over-usage ...... mmmmmm [xx(]

 

[desraid]

most people uses over 3 GB AFAIK.

and few people who uses 2 GB this month, they'll be using 2 GB next month as well. []

 

[caroper]

Hi Desraid,

I Disagree. Most months I am just under or over 2Gb, but if I need to update several PC's in one month I would go way over. As it is I have to spread out my usage over several months, and turn down bussiness, if I feel I will go over the 3Gb. I also need a reserve incase of problems at the month end.

Accumillated bandwith would suit me, in fact I never had a problem with the cap at all, untill the goals shifted to combined totals and port shapeing were introduced.

That effectivly reduced the value of my connetion by more than 50% and was not the service I orriginaly agreed to.

Cheers
Chris

 

[Quazzi]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by microfast</i>
<br />If there were a carry over of under-usage then there will be a carry over of over-usage ...... mmmmmm [xx(]
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I don't know so much. The fact that the cap prevents us from accessing anything international means that we've technically only used 3 Gig. Local bandwidth doesn't count after the cap so why should it be carried over to next month's balance of international bandwidth?

 

[Karnaugh]

why do they "punish" any users at all? Why should "power users" deserve less bandwidth and people who check their email every few hours deserve to have static ip's and bandwidth quota carry over and all sorts of nonsense? Doesnt make sense to me, wait, it makes, it must do if they came up with it. I've got a good idea, Telkom are a "power ISP" lets put a 1TB quota on their Telia peering and tell them "oh, no now we punnish people for using too much bandwidth, tell your customers to cut down please". If you want to get rid of street racing, dont just say "oh no you drive too fast, we are going to fill your tires with Hydrogen now so that if you drive too fast for too long your car will explode", no! You build them a race track so they don't do it on public roads!

<hr noshade size="1">iActive internet services
http://www.iactive.co.za