New ADSL solution launched

[laurie]

http://mybroadband.co.za/news/ADSL/2197.html

I haven't posted for a long time, but after reading these comments I think it is necessary. First of all, the majority of these responses are very negative and it hardly encourages ISP's to innovate at all. There is no way in hell that this product is going to be a money spinner and it was developed for two reasons
1. To be compliant with the regulations
2. To help users to save money without having to
a) run linux
b) run a million line bash script that "may" work and does source
routing which in itself screws a whole bunch of things up.

Lets address the regulations. First of all the inane concept of "local
bandwidth" resulted because of customer pressure and customer
complaints. After two days of public hearings where I went on record saying it was a stupid idea, it was still included in the regulations. Now that it is in the regulations, it appears customers do not want it. So,if you don't like it, you have nobody but your peers to blame. Second of all the regulations state
1. No session timeout
2. local bandwidth will not be subject to the cap
3. Ports will not be prioritized.

You certainly may block stuff as long as it is clear in the contractual agreement. This product complies with all 3 criteria and is therefore compliant.

With regards to waiting 2 minutes. It is at most 2 minutes and should be on average 1 minute. If you are connected in bridge mode, there is no wait at all. Bottom line - the connection has to be reset. If you spend 30 seconds reading gatecrashers script you will see he is doing something similar, but it certainly doesn't look as efficient. Furthermore, he can only break himself with his script and not an entire clientbase.

Finally, there is a very big misconception that we can work out what is local or international. We CAN work out what is local and international but NOT on a per user basis. In order for us to work out what is international and what is local, we have to keep byte counts on a per user basis on each international edge for every single user and be able to aggegrate these byte counts on the fly per user. 50K+ for anyone who can write me a piece of software that will run on ANY cisco ios, can scale to more than 500 000 users and can achieve what is documented above.

Most of the users of these forums know the contraints that we work with in this country and when I read responses like this, it reminds me of the fable "A fisher man's wife". Whenever there is a problem it is TELKOM's fault, however, where is the free peering with MTN/Vodacom/CellC/Verizon/Neotel/IS. What about ISP's that aren't based in Jhb, were is the peering point in Cape Town/Durban/East london What is also amazing is that there is a large number of users on these forums that STILL have adsl accounts with Telkom Internet / do broadband. If you want change don't buy from them, buy from ANY other ISP so that they can have funding to produce what you want. If you keep dealing with the devil, don't complain if he doesn't turn into a saint.

Regards

Laurie

 

[CathJ]

I haven't posted for a long time, but after reading these comments I think it is necessary. First of all, the majority of these responses are very negative and it hardly encourages ISP's to innovate at all. There is no way in hell that this product is going to be a money spinner and it was developed for two reasons
1. To be compliant with the regulations
2. To help users to save money without having to
a) run linux
b) run a million line bash script that "may" work and does source
routing which in itself screws a whole bunch of things up.

I don't think anyone's against ISP innovation, but the product, in the end, has to be worthwhile. Yes, it would be great to have ISP-side alternative to RouteSentry, but this isn't it. It's just not practical.

 

[Highflyer_GP]

Yes, it would be great to have ISP-side alternative to RouteSentry, but this isn't it.

Yep it is. Remember that RS works in bridged mode only. Their product works if you're using NAT as well, even though there is a small wait involved. But if you're running bridged mode it's equivalent to RS, except that it's on the ISP side and you get it from one account.

If you are connected in bridge mode, there is no wait at all.

 

[general_koffi]

The local bandwidth is entirely unshaped, but does not allow for any P2P traffic.

Is Usenet considered "P2P"?

And I presume the local bandwidth is SAIX?

 

[CathJ]

Yep it is. Remember that RS works in bridged mode only. Their product works if you're using NAT as well, even though there is a small wait involved. But if you're running bridged mode it's equivalent to RS, except that it's on the ISP side and you get it from one account.

Yes, but RS works automatically. With this, you have to decide what you're going to be using, and switch it over to the correct bandwidth yourself.

 

[laurie]

I don't think anyone's against ISP innovation, but the product, in the end, has to be worthwhile. Yes, it would be great to have ISP-side alternative to RouteSentry, but this isn't it. It's just not practical.

This product was never meant to be a substitute for route-sentry, which I might add it not the easiest thing on earth to get working, it is meant as an alternative to the 1 + 29 accounts, which a) is port prioritized and b) you are unable to use the 1Gig as international, because you can only go on the local once the account is capped. However instead of slamming the ISP for trying maybe someone should have asked for a test account and we would have tried to accommodate. We are already trying to get a users capextender account to be used with route-sentry. Furthermore, we chose 20Gigs as the capsize based on the myadsl article which says that the average uncapped account uses less than 20Gigs. The same as you as the customer does not want to be exposed to worms - neither do we. If there were constructive suggestions such as "it would be nice if the cap was a little bit bigger" that suggestion would have been considered and if viable implemented. As a matter of interest, p2p is blocked because you pay per Gig after your allocation and at least 50% of new p2p users do not realise that people can pull from them by default. If someone had suggested a hardcap after the local was exhausted in exchanged for dropping the p2p restriction, that too would have been considered. I have stopped reading these forums because in all the time I have read them I have only seen complaints and other ISPs pushing their products - I have yet to see constructive feedback.

You make a rollover product - thats not good enough it must be free.
You make a unshaped product for less than the price of a shaped products- thats not good enough , p2p is blocked
You give the user the option of switching between his local/international cap so that he doesn't waste his international cap on local - no that is not good enough - it is not better than route sentry
You remove the session timeout (which by the way is a very difficult problem ) - that is not good enough because it doesn't fix your ip. ( Stopping the session timeout will NEVER fix your ip under the current ADSL design in this country )

All I ask is that the next time you feel the urge to give your two cents worth how about trying to give a solution along with your complaint, at least then we will be able to try effect your wishes. Furthermore, there is no such thing as Free local bandwidth, somebody has to pay for it. Where are all the free services from days gone by - where is ABSA free internet, where is xsinet . In fact where is All-you-can-eat? Lastly, if you think a new product is a good , but is not quite there yet - ask me for a test account and I will see what I can do to make it better

Regards

Laurie

 

[LifelongGamer]

If you want change don't buy from them, buy from ANY other ISP so that they can have funding to produce what you want. If you keep dealing with the devil, don't complain if he doesn't turn into a saint.

Would be great if there was ANY alternative to Telkom ADSL. Some areas have pathetic wireless coverage. The next closest currently in operation is iBurst and they only have plans for my area next year some time maybe (and they've been in business for a number of years now and I still repeatedly call an agent for signal strength tests with an external omni directional antenna with little success).

What's next? Stop using Telkom altogether to teach them a lesson? Ha, they'll laugh it off and be relived the pressure to fix things is reducing

 

[Kompete]

Noob question..If P2P is unshaped, does this mean online gaming is also unshaped?

If not, then this is a good solution for local gamers like me...now hopefully webafrica will offer something similar so I dont have to move

 

[kris860911]

I like Cybersmart. And this is a pretty good step in the right direction (I'm Not just saying this coz I'm scared Laurie will hit me )

 

[Gatecrasher]

I haven't posted for a long time, but after reading these comments I think it is necessary. First of all, the majority of these responses are very negative and it hardly encourages ISP's to innovate at all. There is no way in hell that this product is going to be a money spinner and it was developed for two reasons
1. To be compliant with the regulations
2. To help users to save money without having to
a) run linux
b) run a million line bash script that "may" work and does source
routing which in itself screws a whole bunch of things up.

You are being a little hyper-sensitive. And as an extra option for your ADSL users it is just fine. As long as people understand the limitations.

But it cannot be dressed up as something it isn't.

A million line bash script?

Lets address the regulations. First of all the inane concept of "local
bandwidth" resulted because of customer pressure and customer
complaints. After two days of public hearings where I went on record saying it was a stupid idea, it was still included in the regulations.

It is not a stupid idea considering the exhorbitant cost of international bandwdith. If bandwidth was even close to reasonably priced in SA then yes, it would not make sense to make the distinction. But given the high cost of broadband in SA, any mechanism that helps reduce bandwdith costs to the end user is not a stupid idea.

With regards to waiting 2 minutes. It is at most 2 minutes and should be on average 1 minute. If you are connected in bridge mode, there is no wait at all. Bottom line - the connection has to be reset. If you spend 30 seconds reading gatecrashers script you will see he is doing something similar, but it certainly doesn't look as efficient. Furthermore, he can only break himself with his script and not an entire clientbase.

My script runs multiple pppoe session simultaneously, so the connection does not have to be reset at all. I can be downloading on my international account, browising on my local IS account, and grabbing news server updates on a local SAIX account - all at the same time. It is seemless.

Of course, there would be many challenges to emulating this at ISP level. And I would take my hat off (and my checkbook out) to any company that could achieve it.

By the same token, I don't think it is wrong to point out that Cybersmart's solution, while being a step in the right direction, falls short of what can be achieved by client-side traffic splitting at a PC or router level.

What is also amazing is that there is a large number of users on these forums that STILL have adsl accounts with Telkom Internet / do broadband. If you want change don't buy from them, buy from ANY other ISP so that they can have funding to produce what you want. If you keep dealing with the devil, don't complain if he doesn't turn into a saint.

If ISPs, in turn, refuse to buy bandwdith from Telkom/SAIX, I'm sure more consumers will take note. But when Telkom's own products are being repackaged and resold by virtually every ISP, boycotting TelkomInternet is a completely meaningless gesture.

 

[laurie]

Noob question..If P2P is unshaped, does this mean online gaming is also unshaped?

If not, then this is a good solution for local gamers like me...now hopefully webafrica will offer something similar so I dont have to move

Yes, it unshaped. Shaping priotises different ports, typically known ports such as 80 (http), 443 (https), 25 (smtp), 110 (pop), 53 (dns) have higher priority than others. Games work (usually) on unknown ports , which is why shaped accounts are generally bad for games as the shaping is heavier because the port they work on are unknown. p2p work on all ports, unknown and known, you can only shape p2p by doing packet inspection. If you REALLY want to do p2p, you can encrypt the traffic and there is no ways ISP can block it. Limewire is already doing ths on their newer version products. So p2p has nothing to do with usenet. When I talk about p2p I specifically mean kazaa protocol and variants, gnutella protocola and variants, fasttrack and bittorrent.

So, your gaming experience should be better especially locally. Most of our traffic is routed via US, so if you are using a UK gaming server, this might not be the solution for you until we break out there which we should be doing shortly.

Regards
Laurie

 

[Gatecrasher]

I have stopped reading these forums because in all the time I have read them I have only seen complaints and other ISPs pushing their products - I have yet to see constructive feedback.

All I ask is that the next time you feel the urge to give your two cents worth how about trying to give a solution along with your complaint, at least then we will be able to try effect your wishes.

There is a very big difference between a company offering a sevice, and the views of potential end-users. You may be lucky and find that end-users will tell you what they want, but very often they don't know what they want until they happen across it. An end-user only has a responsibility for him/herself. He can take your product or leave it. A company has a responsibility to its entire client-base. It is not for end-users to offer solutions. Companies offer solutions. That's their business.

You want constructive feedback, but reading the article, there is nothing about this being a trial, and inviting user feedback. All I see is a bunch of terms and conditions and prices. As far as I can see Cybersmart have already made all the decisions with regard to the product. It is now being offered as a finished product.

When did you do your market research? When did you invite suggestions and feedback?

If your product is receiving a negative response, deal with it in a mature manner. Accept the criticism. Lose the indignation and you will see the criticism is far more supportive and constructive than you think.

 

[Cara]

I am a bit surprised at how negative people were about this new service. The ISPs can only work within the limited framework that Telkom sets, I'm sure they would all love to offer an unlimited service for R200-00 a month but they can't. This local only product is below cost and brings benefits to users who do not have the know-how to split local and international. I think that when a company at least tries to do a good thing they must get credit. Maybe the product doesn't suit your particular needs but in this case I feel Cybersmart has made a good attempt.

 

[mancombseepgood]

I have used routesentry and am currently using Gatecrashers script and neither has anything to do with Cybersmart's solution - they are different things altogether... It's either or with the cybersmart solution and both with the others. Simple.

 

[mancombseepgood]

I am a bit surprised at how negative people were about this new service. The ISPs can only work within the limited framework that Telkom sets, I'm sure they would all love to offer an unlimited service for R200-00 a month but they can't. This local only product is below cost and brings benefits to users who do not have the know-how to split local and international. I think that when a company at least tries to do a good thing they must get credit. Maybe the product doesn't suit your particular needs but in this case I feel Cybersmart has made a good attempt.

The negativity comes from reading the headline thinking you are seeing some real change then reading the article and realising that someone has just taken a lemon, painted it orange and called it sweet.

It's just a let down, that's all... incredibly annoying that we as consumers have to put up with this kind of drivel...

but don't get me wrong, it's not really cybersmart's fault, at least most of it is not - understood - but I do get a tad annoyed with anything that resembles a cell phone offer in complexity, and I will take it out on anyone trying to make money that way.

Is it really that hard to setup routing ala routesentry, etc. at the ISP level? One would think that the hardest part would be maintaining the local IP tables... Strange that a R500 Linksys router can do it.
Of course I don't know the answer to that so I won't hold it to the ISP's...

 

[SSurfer]

First of all the inane concept of "local
bandwidth" resulted because of customer pressure and customer
complaints. After two days of public hearings where I went on record saying it was a stupid idea, it was still included in the regulations. Now that it is in the regulations, it appears customers do not want it. So,if you don't like it, you have nobody but your peers to blame.

When we the consumers asked for uncapped local bandwidth.....did we not specify that it should be free...like the rest of the world?

This is a genuine question..because if we didn't then that was really really stupid.

If this is simply not possible in SA....how the hell does the rest of the world manage it?

 

[stoke]

Hi laurie, thank you for posting here, I really appreciate your viewpoint.

 

[Ekhaatvensters]

If this is simply not possible in SA....how the hell does the rest of the world manage it?

They don't, bandwidth isn't really free anywhere but you pay an all in one cost at realistic rates. Telkom giving local for free wouldn't make much sense unless they bundled it with the DSL line charge, since they have local networks to maintain etc and can't give it away for free. It shouldn't be seperated into a dsl line fee and then ridiculous per gig charges, that is what's holding us back imo.

 

[incaseofire]

If this is simply not possible in SA....how the hell does the rest of the world manage it?

1. Third world country
2. Clueless people in charge of IT
3. Monopolies, why improve if there is no competition?
4. Corruption
5. add your reason here...

 

[ld13]

For those that are interested:

Ok, ive spoken to my ISP. They are creating me a seperate account which refers to LOCAL only (ie. [email protected]) and then my INT one ([email protected]).

There goes the 2 minute waiting time! Go Cybersmart!