TelkomInternet's new Capping System ... I think

Hi there,

TelkomInternet seems to be introducing a new way of managing the bandwidth usage of their subscribers. I have also been reading some posts (like this one), by a forumite, HellB0y who apparently is working for TelkomInternet. From this information I think TelkomInternet is finally moving in line with the rest of the world on managing bandwidth. If this is the case, I think that this is a positive development.

Here's what I understood to be happening, perhaps someone in the know, like Hellb0y, can comment to how accurate this is:

From TelkomInternet's point of view, Users are grouped into 2,3 and 4 gb groups. The aim is to make sure that the average of 2,3, and 4 gb is used at the end of each month in each of these group. So how do you go about doing this?

I guess you can keep a running average of the usage in each group. You want to make sure that the running average is the same as the one allocated for the group (2,3 or 4) - aka target average. Now with the new management method, its a free for all, so some users will run up higher than the target average (remember that saying, cant remember who said it, "I once knew a man who drowned crossing a stream whose average depth was 10cm".) The key to this method is to determine on a periodic basis where and when to cut off users who use too much. Now statistially speaking, this is not too difficult to do. Assuming the usage is normal distribution, which it probably is, to achieve the target average, you can cut off say the top x% of your user at certain cap. Of course this could results in the cap being huge depending on how spread out your usage graph is. Timing would be a problem too, when do you cut people off. I dont think that this is a difficult problem to solve, a second year stats student should be able to come up with a system to do it on a running average basis. Of course, cutting off is only one of a possible way to reach to the target average, other things you can do include, slowing down the link, putting the user in different contention ratio groups, different shaping prority etc. All these factors should allow for an elegant solution that should only results in like say the top 5% getting cut off.

Just some comments:

1. As a user, you will be able to use as much as you want until you become the top x% that needs to be cut off. When this happens depends on the system.

2. the average use for each group will be exactly 2,3 or 4 if you do it right. Meaning that all bandwidth bought collectively by all customers would have been used up. There is an element of cross subsidisation by customers, but there will be some months that you use less and some that you use more. I think this should balance out. Plus, if you are a low usage user and dont want to cross subsidise, it might be worth it to go for the other isp who sells per gig.

3. The bottom line is that telkominternet would have managed to make sure that its total bandwidth use is about the same as (no of user * bandwidth bought by each). This is an alternative to hard capping, since it achieves the same goal (which is making sure users dont collectively use more than than they pay for). Like I said earlier, argument could be made on how fair this system is, but this is essentially how everyone else in the world manage their so called uncapped systems. I think this is a good step and I hope that it works. I still think the numbers 2,3 and 4 are a bit on the low side and could be increased.

4. I think this is a good step. This is way better than the per gig system.

So what do you guys think?

I think the point is, like International developments is doing, speed up the network and stop shaping, limiting and befusing the service with all these money making corrupt schemes.

Where in the world is TELKOM moving in line with the rest of the world? Nobody in the world have this pay per gig system. And at this fraudulent prices. It is international fraud. The data and information is free on the internet. That is why is was established in the first place. Telkom now charge for each bit. If you send someone a e-mail you are paying to send the mail and the receiver pays again to receive the same mail. That excludes the ISP costs for the mail servers.

So now a GOOD THING ? NO way. To extort and defraud you of revenue. YES. Thanx to TELKOM and the Government allows it!

Pupa,

In my post, Im saying that the good thing is that telkominternet is doing the opposite of the per gig system, which is to manage their high usage users on a case by case basis (while still making sure total collective bandwidth used is not more than total collective bandwidth bought). This is what I think TelkomInternet is doing that is more in line with the world. Of course I cant say for the rest of their system. All Im saying that this is a good first step. Surely, we cant expect change to happen over night, just a first step then the next. Perhaps the next step with be the shaping, then the higher cap etc.

Just to make it clearer to everyone, I'm not asking what you think of Telkom's per gig systems that they charge ISPs. Im asking what you think about the way I think TelkomInternet is managing their bandwidth (as described in my post above).

Edited for spelling ..

I noticed that when I went over 3GB my speed decreased 25%.

Pupa,

That email from Telkom is a bit confusing and perhaps misleading, especially if you only focus on the line in red. To me the key part is is that this only happens when the average exceed 3gig and only if you are an extreme user. I've mentioned this in my first post so I'm not going to repeat myself again. from what i understand users will only be cutoff (aka hardcapping) only if they are in the top x%.

I'm not too sure if I explained myself well at all. It seems that I didnt get my points across. ISPs around the world that offer 'uncapped' solution use a similar system to what i describe. they also hardcap (to use your terminology) extremely high usage users (say the top 5%).

Also I'm having trouble understanding what you think TelkomInternet is doing or not doing. Could you please say what you think is wrong with the description that I wrote in my first post of how their new capping system works.

The reason why Im posting this is to get over all the confusion.. trying to get al the telkom ppl in here to explain exactly how things works. So I agree that this is confusion.

what's so positive about it

you pay R 680.00 + R 80.00 for your 1Mb line RENTAL only with 0 Gigs

in the UK my friend pays 34 pounds for 1Mb unlimited access (10 rental + 24 for the ISP)

this guys are pathetic, but much more pathetic is the government for doing nothing about it !!!

Spindrift said:

ISPs around the world that offer 'uncapped' solution use a similar system to what i describe. they also hardcap (to use your terminology) extremely high usage users (say the top 5%).

Click to expand...

fair enough but do you think they assign 3 Gig per person in a group???

didn't think so

Again, Im asking for comments on TelkomInternet's (possible) new caping system as described in my first post. We all know how all the negative things about telkom's double line rental, low cap, extreme shaping, high cost etc. I'm not talking about that here.

Antonio, In my first post I did describe the positives of this possible system. I say possible because it hasnt been confirmed. If you have any comments on this bandwidth management system (which is essentially the same as everywhere else) .. please tell us.

Antonio said:

fair enough but do you think they assign 3 Gig per person in a group???

didn't think so

Click to expand...

I did say in my original comments (point 3) that i think 2,3 and 4 gig allocations are too low.

Read Telkom managers view in the quote !

This quote below was from the TELKOM Internet manger recently to me, I have read what was said and seen what happened on the contrary. Telkom is not moving away from the per gig billing, they IMHO is just making it as confusing as possible, blaming the ISP's, so it is made out that they are doing it, not TELKOM. They manage their bandwidth unlike anywhere else in the world. It is a new scheme thought out by the Telkom Internet management on how they can best live with the situation their management and IT technicians is forcing on them. This is to compete and gain a unfair advantage on the other true ISP resellers. So it is a improvement within the ridiculous cap, and NO it is still the same system. Yes it is aligned to make more money not satisfy the customers. The below 1 Gig user will benefit above 3 gig and you become another abuser. Thus nothing new!

Apologies for the late reply.

Well the usage option has just kicked in and most [no I fib, all ISP] are blaming Telkom for the hard cap and then we [TI] went and did a shared option based on average so hence the late reply as I have been fielding mails about how we cant do it with a almost no cap service due to mom's a pops not using their full allocation etc etc, so it's been fun while I justify how we will do it until the average gets above 3 Gig that is and then we are just another hard capping ISP.

Also got the update on SHDSL and the new xDSL technologies and what we can do over the true broadband services, so things are very very busy here, did the trail things with MS and their IPTV model and xBox, just so much happening.

I have always like MTNNS, have tried my luck to get in there but no go, so I think if they get their act together with true convergence things should go well, they are smaller enough still to be able to offer good service, that's a win already.

Click to expand...

@Spindrift & MaD

Did you notice if the IP addr you were allocated after 3Gigs came from a different IP range (from the one before 3Gigs).

This would answer the question of whether TelkomInternet keeps you in the normal uncapped bw pool after 3Gigs or they put you in new 'after 3Gig' pool ('shared' as they call it) with potentially different perfromance metrics (e.g. total bw ceiling, contention, shaping etc.).

If its the former, then their 3Gig product is now basically a fully uncapped service if you behave (e.g. dont continually roger it with P2P). If it is the latter then it will probably degrade to them same point as international on the old softcap system (i.e. as more ppl climbed aboard, it eventually became un-usable).

Pupa,

Do you think their new scheme is different to one i described or the same? In which way is it different. Dont get me wrong, I do think that a lot of things telkom do is not right and need to be changed. Im just trying to be objective about the whole thing and at least get an idea of how they are doing things before I judge it. The email from Telkom is very confusing and does not help much in sheding light on how the system works. You seem like you have an idea of how it works, Please enlighten me if you can.

Spindrift said:

I did say in my original comments (point 3) that i think 2,3 and 4 gig allocations are too low.

Click to expand...

So this discussion is pointless as the cap is to low, you agreed, the model TELKOM use is unique to them only and far from international standards or any line of development and we pay way to much for the service TELKOm wants us to believe is a good thing

That email from Telkom is a bit confusing and perhaps misleading, especially if you only focus on the line in red. To me the key part is is that this only happens when the average exceed 3gig and only if you are an extreme user. I've mentioned this in my first post so I'm not going to repeat myself again. from what i understand users will only be cutoff (aka hardcapping) only if they are in the top x%.

Click to expand...

This comes from TELKOM management, so if it is confusing that is exactly what they want. Speak with a forked tonque, confuse the people as in the past, and then the moneymaking Spin remains as the drift TELKOM is taking.

This is what they want to achieve. Make you feel that what they are doing is good within the limits they impose on us themselves, for their own dark reasons.

So I say NO again and will not agree. It is not a good thing. Getting in line with International trends where you pay for the bandwith with no or high cap, at high speed without shaping is the ONLY good thing

pupa,

the 3gb i was refering to that is too low.. is the the target average for the entire user base.. not the cap per individual. I think that the system they use is the same as other ISPs in other countries - only the numbers, such as the target average differs. I still get the distinct impression that you think that my description is not correct. If this is the case, please tell me where you think I went wrong.

Also I agree telkom's email is confusing so there's probably not much point to talking about it because it'll confuse the issue more.

Come on Pupa, stop acting like a mindless zealot ... you're obviously not graspng the issue at hand (as posed by Spindrift) and are hellbent on pursing your own agenda in other threads.

Mods maybe you can set up a new forum called 'The World According to Pupa' so other forums/threads are not continually derailed from their original purpose by Lord Pupa.

BTW any feedback on the IP addr question I pose above?

Just a thought

TelkomInternet's method of managing their bandwidth appears to rely on average usage of their clients. I believe this is one of the reasons that they allowed the smaller ISP's to provide the 30Gig accounts for a limited period thereby causing most of the high bandwidth users to change ISP.

As they can gain initial subscribers more easily than the competitors as the only line provider they most likely have a much larger percentage of low bandwidth users than any other ISP. The new method of allowing the ISP to manage averages therefore gives them a totally unfair advantage in the marketplace.

Roman4604,

If only I can be as bold as you. .. to your IP issue - to be honest I havent notice the difference. I have exceed the 3gb 'target average' (lol .. its not cap anymore is it . . .. ps if telkom wants to use that term, they better pay me a lot of money ) and im still on the 165.146.xxx.xxx range. However, I do notice some slow downs and some problem with p2p after 3gb has been reached. Perhaps they are tweaking their system at the moment. I'll look back at the different IP address I got connected before and after the 3gb and see if there's a pattern. Will report back asap.

mikef said:

The new method of allowing the ISP to manage averages therefore gives them a totally unfair advantage in the marketplace.

Click to expand...

If TelkomInternet (together with SAIX) have engineered a new 'post cap bandwidth pool' system by which they can allow users to continue using traffic, but can limit the cost impact by having finer management (e.g. can alter pool bw ceiling, contention etc.), then this is very anti-competative as they dont offer this system/tool to other ISPs.

That is why my IP addr question is important, to see if they do in fact have this new system.

mikef,

mikef said:

The new method of allowing the ISP to manage averages therefore gives them a totally unfair advantage in the marketplace.

Click to expand...

From what you described, it seems both isps and telkom have to manage their own averages. In this sense i think the system is fair, IF both telkom and isp plays under the same rule. As I've said over and over, the only way you will be able to prove that they are not is to prove that telkominternet consistently go over the (no of user * total bandwidth allocated to each) mark. The system I described above should make sure that this does not happen.

However, what I think is unfair though, is the fact that Telkom has a marketing advantage as a line provider. When you order adsl, they have a chance to promote their own product over others.

Roman4604 said:

Come on Pupa, stop acting like a mindless zealot ... you're obviously not graspng the issue at hand (as posed by Spindrift) and are hellbent on pursing your own agenda in other threads.

Mods maybe you can set up a new forum called 'The World According to Pupa' so other forums/threads are not continually derailed from their original purpose by Lord Pupa.

BTW any feedback on the IP addr question I pose above?

Click to expand...

Roman you comments is as useless as they were on other posts you made. Stop playing the man and concentrate on the ball at least spindrift try to clear up the issue at hand where you tend to go off topic in most cases with you pointless remarks instead if opinions. I gave my opinion on the question asked and remains with it..

Spindrift said:

pupa,

the 3gb i was refering to that is too low.. is the the target average for the entire user base.. not the cap per individual. I think that the system they use is the same as other ISPs in other countries - only the numbers, such as the target average differs. I still get the distinct impression that you think that my description is not correct. If this is the case, please tell me where you think I went wrong.

Also I agree telkom's email is confusing so there's probably not much point to talking about it because it'll confuse the issue more.

Click to expand...

Now this clears it up a bit more. If this is what they are doing then yes as I said it could be a improvement within the limits they impose and as R dahl stated the previous model would not work. We have to see where this goes, but still is not what we pay for IMHO. Can you refer me to the other countries ISP's that does this?