Does local traffic count towards your cap?

D

DavidDB

New Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hi there, I guess the Title says it all: Does local traffic count towards your cap?

I remember something about ICASA saying that from 1 Feb 2007 local traffic should no longer be counted towards your cap. Am I correct?

Thanks.
David.
 
All traffic local, international, up and down still counts towards the cap.
 
As far as I know Icasa gave no date with regard to the local capping issue. If I understand it correctly then the ISPs should have take action the day that the regs came into force.
 
DavidDB said:
Hi there, I guess the Title says it all: Does local traffic count towards your cap?

I remember something about ICASA saying that from 1 Feb 2007 local traffic should no longer be counted towards your cap. Am I correct?

Thanks.
David.
Click to expand...

Yes currently local does count towards your cap. AFAIK the most accepted interpretation of the regulations is that isp's may not restrict access to local sites after your cap is reached - however there is also nothing said on if this can be charged for or not. As they stand the regulations are useless although even if they were clear telkom just ignores them and no action is being taken by ICASA
 
Currently, ISP's hands are tied. Telkom/SAIX would have to make various changes first.
 
yup, its all up to when IS or Telkom/Saix or other ADSL network providers change their accounting system.. tho as long as saix charges for it, the same as international, makes it artificiality expensive.
 
DavidDB said:
Hi there, I guess the Title says it all: Does local traffic count towards your cap?

I remember something about ICASA saying that from 1 Feb 2007 local traffic should no longer be counted towards your cap. Am I correct?

Thanks.
David.
Click to expand...

We got telskum everything counts!!!!!!:(
 
you know in this way I think the other providers in particularly IS have been missing a step.. i mean sure, they are stuck using saix infrastructure but if they could somehow, which some do claim is still possible, separate the count of local and international that would win them over some clients. [tho not everyone wants satellite latency for some applications]
 
Does that chocolate you ate while waiting to pay count towards your bill?
I dont believe local should be free, something needs to be charged, like it or not.
 
Ambiguous Regulations.

What if the ISP's obeyed the "law" as in not hard capping customers from Local Bandwidth.
And when Telkom bills them for the extra local bandwidth, the ISP's refuse to pay, referring Telkom to ICASA and the ADSL Regulations. :D
The ISP's with the support of the ISP Forum should have pre-empted this move by sending Telkom the necessary paperwork informing them of their intention beforehand as a gentle reminder of the countries rules/laws, no matter how ambiguous they are.

The Law is the Law never mind how Telkom's lawyers may or may not interpret it. The intention to create ADSL Regulations is there, although not in a material sense, but still there. We know what was "agreed" upon within the draft regulations, which MyADSL supported btw.
What happened to that document is a point of debate still.

How in this day and age with so many qualified people with Law Degrees do we have regulations that are so full of holes? A first year law student could have done a better job.
Really and truly pathetic.
 
local should be free. We pay so much as it is, we deserve something. That or prices must drop MASSIVELY.
 
Tell me someone, what service in South African life is free, do you really believe local will become free as i dont think so.
 
BTTB said:
What if the ISP's obeyed the "law" as in not hard capping customers from Local Bandwidth.
And when Telkom bills them for the extra local bandwidth, the ISP's refuse to pay, referring Telkom to ICASA and the ADSL Regulations. :D
Click to expand...

At the moment, this is not possible. As Krycor mentioned, SAIX would have to change their accounting.
how do ISP's know when to cap your international? SAIX sends accounting packets with an account's total combined usage. So on a 3GB account, for example, your first 3GB would be local & international combined. Should the ISP cap your international then, even though you didn't use 3GB international?

IS could do it, but they would still have to pay the same rate, regardless of whether it was local or not.
 
sin_x said:
IS could do it, but they would still have to pay the same rate, regardless of whether it was local or not.
Click to expand...

Same rate as and for what? As far as I'm aware they pay Telkom for IPConnect but it's a set monthly fee. They don't get charged for how much traffic flows through it.

Lots of people here would flock to IS accounts if it meant they didn't have to use things like Routesentry to direct their traffic anymore. Plus it would probably work out cheaper for users. And if IS did it it would force Telkom to do the same. So why don't they?

Someone tell me what I'm missing?
 
Last edited:
Ok, point taken. IS does have IPConnect, but it is flat rate dependant on the size of the link.
If none of their customers ever got capped, IS would most likely have to up the link?
 
sin_x said:
Ok, point taken. IS does have IPConnect, but it is flat rate dependant on the size of the link.
If none of their customers ever got capped, IS would most likely have to up the link?
Click to expand...

True, they'd have to lower contention. Still, give people the option at potentially a slightly higher cost to pay for the extra bandwidth and see if there are any takers. I'm sure it can't be that hard for them to tweak the accounting stuff to allow this.

Of course if they were to make it an option they'd probably be forced by enraged users to make it the default.

But having said all that, it shouldn't be too hard for them to set up a trial.
 
Don't forget it would mean u need only one account instead of 2, and not need to use your international for local, i.e. chances of getting capped would be lower even if the 30GB local cap was retained. So in a way it might work out better not to do it.. then again there are local only accounts, so why not just give the public what they want?

If it was done, i'd switch over to a true roll-over account for saix (one payment till i reach cap) to route my mud connection thru(400ms is just about ok, 900ms will kill it) and use IS for other traffic.
 
Last edited:
sin_x said:
Ok, point taken. IS does have IPConnect, but it is flat rate dependant on the size of the link.
If none of their customers ever got capped, IS would most likely have to up the link?
Click to expand...

If you don't charge people per MB but per connection, you are bound to get more clients thus you increase your clients and the your capacity.

According to international best practices, it is not in the best interest to charge per MB.:sick:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X