Bandwidth hogs - are they real?

[schurtek]

1 to 1 is not practical... as it will make the cost of bandwidth way to expensive.

but 60 to 1 should be illegal.

 

[CambodiaDave]

Survey

Hi Guys,

We're running a survey.

Requested packages for DigiChilli.

http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?t=207431

Ta

 

[CambodiaDave]

Bandwidth hogs cannot exist on a per gig data model. They pay per gig, they get their gigs. ISPs make their money per gig. No hogging, just good ol' commerce.

The question of 'hogs' is only appropriate in an uncapped environment. Here its the ISP's responsibility to manage the network so that 'bandwidth hogs' do not affect other users.

Acceptable usage may classify them as as 'hogs', but a management strategy should be all that is needed. Our average users are doing 50 gig/month on a R300 package. They're not 'hogs'. They're just starved of access to data and poor after paying for all those gigs. Some chilli guys have done 200 Gigs in 10 days. They're still not 'hogs' because they're making use of the network. On top of that most are self-managing and are making sure that they don't undermine the operation of the network as a whole.

The user that purposely and maliciously tries to avoid the ISP's management at the detriment to other users on the network may be classified as a 'hog'. Even here, the ISP has to manage the network so that this doesn't happen.

Strategies of pulling desired content closer and providing faster access to alleviate bottlenecks is probably the best strategy.

Even 'hogs' will get tired of buying more and more storage at some point.

An overall policy of network management, user management and content management makes the 'hogs' urban legends.

 

[msmoorad]

hogs

nobody is saying that cont ratios should be 1:1 but on the other hand, anything over10:1, i think, is unfair.

and why again are you people talking as if the current situation is OK /acceptable -now all thats left is to focus on those hogging the lines?
there more important thing-like continuous pressure on telkom, ICASA , big ISP's & Dept ofComms to get their act together.
i dont think that our efforts so far have been in vain- look how things are beginning to shape up. but some act as if weve already arrived.

 

[schurtek]

nobody is saying that cont ratios should be 1:1 but on the other hand, anything over10:1, i think, is unfair.

Quite a few have made the suggestion towards 1:1 contention ratios being used and that the price should be like R500 for 4MB uncapped 1:1... at that rate we will be poorer than Zimbabwe in under a week.

and why again are you people talking as if the current situation is OK /acceptable -now all thats left is to focus on those hogging the lines?

We are not talking as if the situation is acceptable. We are arguing the point presented. As a nation, we should receive highspeed uncontended community bandwidth at no charge above the normal connection price. On top of that we pay for local bandwidth (within SA) at a fair price (R2 per GB? - which will never happen as long as the connection costs for Point-to-Point local highspeed fibre are higher than paying off the Parlimentry Offices' bond.) And then International bandwidth should come in at a much lower contention ratio at a retail of say R10 per GB? This will also never happen until highspeed fibre comes down - oh, and the cost of IPC.)

there more important thing-like continuous pressure on telkom, ICASA , big ISP's & Dept ofComms to get their act together.
i dont think that our efforts so far have been in vain- look how things are beginning to shape up. but some act as if weve already arrived.

Pressure is mounting, but sadly, the advance has been slow... so we celebrate what ever we can get.