Discussion:
More info on new plans
Ian Batterbee
2006-02-13 05:53:22 UTC
Permalink
http://www.telecom.co.nz/chm/0,5123,205112-203090,00.html

In a nutshell, they've come up with 7 emotively named plans (basic, go,
explorer, adventure, pro, pro advanced, and pro ultra) that still charge
like a wounded bull. I've haven't seen any of the other ISPs come out
with UBS plan information yet, but I expect they'll all be rather similar.

The Basic plan is 256/128 for $29.95 with a rather embaressing 200mb
data cap (come on.. even windows update, virus updates, etc will chew
through that pretty quickly)

Go (2048/128) is the only plan that stays at 2mbps, and has a 1GB cap
($39.95)

Explorer ($49.95) and Adventure ($59.95) are 3500/128, with absolutely
pathetic 5gb and 10gb caps respectively, and unless you want to pay
$79.95 per month or more to go to Pro and beyond, you're still stuck on
128kbps upstream. Many would argue that even at 2048/128, the upstream
rate already impacts, or even limits the download speed (more so if you
have more than one user on your home network), so I wonder what the hell
the think people are going to do with their 3.5mbps download speed if
they can't send ACKs fast enough to get that speed anyway.

Remember, Telecom counts traffic in BOTH directions, so the more they
increase the speed, the more easily they allow people to hit their cap,
which in turn forces their customers to upgrade to a plan they didn't
really want just so they can still use the internet for the last 2-3
weeks of their billing cycle.

Oh, and the usual "if you don't have your tolls with us, you can add $10
to all those plans" restriction applies.

You have to admire telecom for their marketing strategy here - the
people that have been complaining about their upstream rate and change
to the 512kbps plans will be paying more than they did before, which
means more profit for telecom. The people who currently have dialup and
never use the internet will be sucked in to the go plan so that they can
run google earth and see all those things their grandchildren have told
them about, and once they do they'll exceed their 200MB cap and have to
"upgrade" to the $39.95 go plan, which again means more profit for Telecom.

And finally, my physical connect rate here is is only 2560kbps
(admittedly, with g.lite) - so even if I went to a 3.5mbs plan, the
crappy copper I have to my socket would be the limiting factor for me. I
remember that telecom used to say that they wouldn't enable ADSL for
anyone that couldn't connect to the exchange at at least 2mbps - I
wonder if they'll up that figure, or if they'll start re-laying copper
in those locations where people have asked for 3.5mbps and can't get it
due to the quality of the wires.




--
This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list.
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ,
and various documents.
To unsubscribe: send mail to ***@lists.unixathome.org
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message
Simon Byrnand
2006-02-13 06:41:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ian Batterbee
And finally, my physical connect rate here is is only 2560kbps
(admittedly, with g.lite) - so even if I went to a 3.5mbs plan, the
crappy copper I have to my socket would be the limiting factor for me. I
remember that telecom used to say that they wouldn't enable ADSL for
anyone that couldn't connect to the exchange at at least 2mbps - I
wonder if they'll up that figure, or if they'll start re-laying copper
in those locations where people have asked for 3.5mbps and can't get it
due to the quality of the wires.
Actually, Telecom currently limit the DSL rate based on the plan that
you're on, and 2560Kbit is the standard figure for a 2Mbit plan, that
doesn't mean thats all your line is capable of.

I also get exactly 2560Kbit DSL rate whereas on the previous plan I was on
that didnt rate limit the DSL rate it was 7616Kbit.

Likewise 256Kbit plans limit the downstream DSL rate to 320Kbit.

Regards,
Simon


--
This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list.
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ,
and various documents.
To unsubscribe: send mail to ***@lists.unixathome.org
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message
Mark Foster
2006-02-13 09:30:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simon Byrnand
Post by Ian Batterbee
And finally, my physical connect rate here is is only 2560kbps
(admittedly, with g.lite) - so even if I went to a 3.5mbs plan, the
crappy copper I have to my socket would be the limiting factor for me. I
remember that telecom used to say that they wouldn't enable ADSL for
anyone that couldn't connect to the exchange at at least 2mbps - I
wonder if they'll up that figure, or if they'll start re-laying copper
in those locations where people have asked for 3.5mbps and can't get it
due to the quality of the wires.
Actually, Telecom currently limit the DSL rate based on the plan that
you're on, and 2560Kbit is the standard figure for a 2Mbit plan, that
doesn't mean thats all your line is capable of.
I also get exactly 2560Kbit DSL rate whereas on the previous plan I was on
that didnt rate limit the DSL rate it was 7616Kbit.
Likewise 256Kbit plans limit the downstream DSL rate to 320Kbit.
Uhmm

Line Status ADSL Link Speed 4576 kbps 320 kbps


I'm on 2mbit. What you say?



--
This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list.
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ,
and various documents.
To unsubscribe: send mail to ***@lists.unixathome.org
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message
Mark Foster
2006-02-13 09:37:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Foster
Post by Simon Byrnand
Actually, Telecom currently limit the DSL rate based on the plan that
you're on, and 2560Kbit is the standard figure for a 2Mbit plan, that
doesn't mean thats all your line is capable of.
I also get exactly 2560Kbit DSL rate whereas on the previous plan I was on
that didnt rate limit the DSL rate it was 7616Kbit.
Likewise 256Kbit plans limit the downstream DSL rate to 320Kbit.
Uhmm
Line Status ADSL Link Speed 4576 kbps 320 kbps
I'm on 2mbit. What you say?
To Clarify, i've always understood Jetstream in NZ to be
RA-ADSL (RADSL?) - Rate Adaptive, (Asyncronous) Digital Subscriber Line.
Aka, the downstream rate is rate-adaptive based on the line capabilities.

Rate Limiting is imposed at a higher layer. I don't see Telecom
indicating that'll change, more that theyll increase the rate limit
thresholds.

But without movement on our data caps, as Ian says, its just going to be
'that much easier' to hit em.

Mark.
--
This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list.
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ,
and various documents.
To unsubscribe: send mail to ***@lists.unixathome.org
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message
Alastair Johnson
2006-02-13 10:02:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Foster
To Clarify, i've always understood Jetstream in NZ to be
RA-ADSL (RADSL?) - Rate Adaptive, (Asyncronous) Digital Subscriber Line.
Aka, the downstream rate is rate-adaptive based on the line capabilities.
Rate Limiting is imposed at a higher layer. I don't see Telecom
indicating that'll change, more that theyll increase the rate limit
thresholds.
But without movement on our data caps, as Ian says, its just going to be
'that much easier' to hit em.
No. Telecom introduced DSLAM based rate-limiting some time ago. UBS
users will be limited to 2560Kbps on a 2Mb UBS plan. Non-UBS users
probably won't be, based on my experience.

aj
--
This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list.
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ,
and various documents.
To unsubscribe: send mail to ***@lists.unixathome.org
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message
Mark Foster
2006-02-13 10:06:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Foster
To Clarify, i've always understood Jetstream in NZ to be
RA-ADSL (RADSL?) - Rate Adaptive, (Asyncronous) Digital Subscriber Line.
Aka, the downstream rate is rate-adaptive based on the line capabilities.
Rate Limiting is imposed at a higher layer. I don't see Telecom indicating
that'll change, more that theyll increase the rate limit thresholds.
But without movement on our data caps, as Ian says, its just going to be
'that much easier' to hit em.
No. Telecom introduced DSLAM based rate-limiting some time ago. UBS users
will be limited to 2560Kbps on a 2Mb UBS plan. Non-UBS users probably won't
be, based on my experience.
Must be a UBS-ism then. I'm on Xtra, therefore not on UBS... and have been
with Xtra since the inception of UBS. Fair enough.

Mark.
--
This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list.
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ,
and various documents.
To unsubscribe: send mail to ***@lists.unixathome.org
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message
Alastair Johnson
2006-02-13 10:08:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Foster
Post by Alastair Johnson
No. Telecom introduced DSLAM based rate-limiting some time ago. UBS
users will be limited to 2560Kbps on a 2Mb UBS plan. Non-UBS users
probably won't be, based on my experience.
Must be a UBS-ism then. I'm on Xtra, therefore not on UBS... and have
been with Xtra since the inception of UBS. Fair enough.
It is not unique to Xtra. 256K and 128K plans were also DSLAM limited.

aj
--
This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list.
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ,
and various documents.
To unsubscribe: send mail to ***@lists.unixathome.org
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message
Simon Byrnand
2006-02-13 10:14:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Foster
Post by Mark Foster
To Clarify, i've always understood Jetstream in NZ to be
RA-ADSL (RADSL?) - Rate Adaptive, (Asyncronous) Digital Subscriber Line.
Aka, the downstream rate is rate-adaptive based on the line
capabilities.
Rate Limiting is imposed at a higher layer. I don't see Telecom indicating
that'll change, more that theyll increase the rate limit thresholds.
But without movement on our data caps, as Ian says, its just going to be
'that much easier' to hit em.
No. Telecom introduced DSLAM based rate-limiting some time ago. UBS users
will be limited to 2560Kbps on a 2Mb UBS plan. Non-UBS users probably won't
be, based on my experience.
Must be a UBS-ism then. I'm on Xtra, therefore not on UBS... and have been
with Xtra since the inception of UBS. Fair enough.
No, it applies to Xtra as well. I reluctantly moved from another ISP on
Jetstream Plus last year to Xtra, (as none of the UBS offerings suited my
needs) and my DSL line rate was previously 7616Kbit down, 384Kbit up, for
a plan that was 2Mbit down and 192Kbit up.

After the changeover to Xtra the DSL line rate has dropped to 2560Kbit
down and 160Kbit up, and I was forced to drop from 192Kbit upstream to
128kbit, even though technically I could have kept the old rate.

Ironically, if I had already been an Xtra customer back when the 192Kbit
plans were still officially available, I would have been able to keep the
192Kbit upstream as a grandfathered plan :-(

The only reason your DSL line rate is not set to 2560Kbit right now is
because your DSL line configuration is still a legacy profile - if you
change plans that involve any change in speed you will get "noticed" and
your line rate will be corrected...(or updated, Telecom would probably
call it)

It's important to note that the actual data throttling is NOT done by the
DSL line rate - but they do limit the DSL line rate to the data rate + the
necessary overhead to avoid the DSL rate being unnecessarily high compared
to the plan you're on.

Regards,
Simon


--
This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list.
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ,
and various documents.
To unsubscribe: send mail to ***@lists.unixathome.org
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message
Mark Foster
2006-02-13 21:31:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simon Byrnand
The only reason your DSL line rate is not set to 2560Kbit right now is
because your DSL line configuration is still a legacy profile - if you
change plans that involve any change in speed you will get "noticed" and
your line rate will be corrected...(or updated, Telecom would probably
call it)
It's important to note that the actual data throttling is NOT done by the
DSL line rate - but they do limit the DSL line rate to the data rate + the
necessary overhead to avoid the DSL rate being unnecessarily high compared
to the plan you're on.
I just moved house, Auckland -> Wellington. Nothings changed?

And note we're talking downlink rates as well as uplink rates.

I'm curious now as to why I seem to be such an oddball-config. Doesnt
make a difference in terms of my actual Internet experience, though.

Mark.

--
This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list.
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ,
and various documents.
To unsubscribe: send mail to ***@lists.unixathome.org
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message

Matt Brown
2006-02-13 10:05:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Foster
To Clarify, i've always understood Jetstream in NZ to be
RA-ADSL (RADSL?) - Rate Adaptive, (Asyncronous) Digital Subscriber Line.
Aka, the downstream rate is rate-adaptive based on the line capabilities.
That used to be the case but it is now incorrect.

Telecom has stated numerous times recently that they now have a copper
spectral management policy that syncs your line only up to the speed
that you have paid for + some ATM overhead. The motivation for this is
supposedly to reduce the amount of interference within the cable sheath
and hence increase the reach of the current ADSL technology.

It's a contentious issue as the way that Telecom chooses to do this is
very different to how other Telco's around the world are doing it.

This spectrum management issue was at the heart of their arguments as to
why they could not offer "full-rate" or "unconstrained" download rates
as TCL was requesting.

If you're interested in this further I suggest that you read up on the
material presented at the conference held on TCLs application where
Telecom laid out their methodology in detail. The info is available at:
http://www.comcom.govt.nz/IndustryRegulation/Telecommunications/Wholesale/WholesaleDeterminatons/telstraclearwholesalebitstreamserviceap.aspx#345

HTH to clarify things.

Cheers
--
Matt Brown
***@mattb.net.nz
Mob +64 275 611 544 www.mattb.net.nz

--
This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list.
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ,
and various documents.
To unsubscribe: send mail to ***@lists.unixathome.org
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message
Joel Wiramu Pauling
2006-02-13 13:18:24 UTC
Permalink
Throw my 0.02cents in...

512kps up is good... Horah... Yay... but I don't see them being able to
provide that speed upstream for a good portion of customers.

I could be wrong but remember back to the old days, I never connected
upstream more than 500kps.

In the meantime, I have moved to a wireless carrier that, while has it's
ups and downs so to speak, is pretty good.

Now I am very annoyed at the whole peering debacle. I think ComCom and
the government would be better off forcing Telstra to repeer and telecom
to peer, it would have a significant positive impact in a number of
ways.

Joel W

--
This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list.
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ,
and various documents.
To unsubscribe: send mail to ***@lists.unixathome.org
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message
Ian Batterbee
2006-02-13 08:25:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simon Byrnand
Actually, Telecom currently limit the DSL rate based on the plan that
you're on, and 2560Kbit is the standard figure for a 2Mbit plan, that
doesn't mean thats all your line is capable of.
I also get exactly 2560Kbit DSL rate whereas on the previous plan I
was on
that didnt rate limit the DSL rate it was 7616Kbit.
Likewise 256Kbit plans limit the downstream DSL rate to 320Kbit.
That's true, but back in the days where we used to connect at full speed
and it was shaped later down the track, it still only connected at about
3100kbps (from memory), so I expect it would still be a problem for me,
and I'm sure it would be the case for others as well.

--
This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list.
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ,
and various documents.
To unsubscribe: send mail to ***@lists.unixathome.org
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message
LEE Tet Yoon
2006-02-13 09:43:11 UTC
Permalink
I think most of us regard these new plans rather cynicially given Telecom's complete failure to reach their original target of 83,333 wholesale customers (which they then failed to change into a 1/3 new connections target). Given the noise coming out of the CC and the government, Telecom must be rather jittery. However while pricing for UBS etc hasn't yet leaked out, it appears Telecom hasn't yet decided to play nice. It's bad enough that ISP who don't accept the offer might be left out in the cold for a year or two while the CC reaches a decision as happened previously but it's gotten worse. According to Computerworld they appear to be blackmailing ISPs into accepting their offer (whatever the offer is) since if even one rejects, they'll reassess the situation.

http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/news/0A43C597ACCCD7B6CC25711000701FA4
http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/news/28363DAAB75B1F61CC2571140028E35A

This appears to be rather a bad move on their part IMHO but I guess they decided if they're going to go down, they might as well go down guns blazing. We can only hope the government, CC and ISPs stay equally as strong...
Post by Ian Batterbee
http://www.telecom.co.nz/chm/0,5123,205112-203090,00.html
In a nutshell, they've come up with 7 emotively named plans (basic, go, explorer, adventure, pro, pro advanced, and pro ultra) that still charge like a wounded bull. I've haven't seen any of the other ISPs come out with UBS plan information yet, but I expect they'll all be rather similar.
The Basic plan is 256/128 for $29.95 with a rather embaressing 200mb data cap (come on.. even windows update, virus updates, etc will chew through that pretty quickly)
Go (2048/128) is the only plan that stays at 2mbps, and has a 1GB cap ($39.95)
Explorer ($49.95) and Adventure ($59.95) are 3500/128, with absolutely pathetic 5gb and 10gb caps respectively, and unless you want to pay $79.95 per month or more to go to Pro and beyond, you're still stuck on 128kbps upstream. Many would argue that even at 2048/128, the upstream rate already impacts, or even limits the download speed (more so if you have more than one user on your home network), so I wonder what the hell the think people are going to do with their 3.5mbps download speed if they can't send ACKs fast enough to get that speed anyway.
Remember, Telecom counts traffic in BOTH directions, so the more they increase the speed, the more easily they allow people to hit their cap, which in turn forces their customers to upgrade to a plan they didn't really want just so they can still use the internet for the last 2-3 weeks of their billing cycle.
Oh, and the usual "if you don't have your tolls with us, you can add $10 to all those plans" restriction applies.
You have to admire telecom for their marketing strategy here - the people that have been complaining about their upstream rate and change to the 512kbps plans will be paying more than they did before, which means more profit for telecom. The people who currently have dialup and never use the internet will be sucked in to the go plan so that they can run google earth and see all those things their grandchildren have told them about, and once they do they'll exceed their 200MB cap and have to "upgrade" to the $39.95 go plan, which again means more profit for Telecom.
And finally, my physical connect rate here is is only 2560kbps (admittedly, with g.lite) - so even if I went to a 3.5mbs plan, the crappy copper I have to my socket would be the limiting factor for me. I remember that telecom used to say that they wouldn't enable ADSL for anyone that couldn't connect to the exchange at at least 2mbps - I wonder if they'll up that figure, or if they'll start re-laying copper in those locations where people have asked for 3.5mbps and can't get it due to the quality of the wires.
--
This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list.
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ,
and various documents.
To unsubscribe: send mail to ***@lists.unixathome.org
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message
Reuben Farrelly
2006-02-13 10:11:29 UTC
Permalink
Hi Ian,
Post by Ian Batterbee
And finally, my physical connect rate here is is only 2560kbps
(admittedly, with g.lite) - so even if I went to a 3.5mbs plan, the
crappy copper I have to my socket would be the limiting factor for me. I
And you call that "crappy copper" ?

Typically for me:

router#show dsl int atm0
ATM0
Alcatel 20150 chipset information
ATU-R (DS) ATU-C (US)
Modem Status: Showtime (DMTDSL_SHOWTIME)
DSL Mode: ITU G.992.1 (G.DMT) Annex A
ITU STD NUM: 0x01 0x1
Vendor ID: 'ALCB' 'ALCB'
Vendor Specific: 0x0000 0x0000
Vendor Country: 0x00 0x0F
Capacity Used: 98% 40%
Noise Margin: 10.0 dB 25.0 dB
Output Power: 18.0 dBm 9.0 dBm
Attenuation: 60.0 dB 31.5 dB

Interleave Fast Interleave Fast
Speed (kbps): 1152 0 160 0


...and I'm in suburban Mt Albert/Owairaka, approximately 3.4 km from the Mt.
Albert exchange, so not that far. After speaking to one of the Downers guys one
day, he told me that the cables are well packed out around Mt. Albert shops
where the cables run, and interference from other users and lines in the duct is
pretty common (although line speed has been stable for me lately but hasn't
always been in the past).

The new plans only offer the possibility of a higher uplink speed, which would
be good and an improvement on what I have now. I am happy on 1Mbit if I really
do get 1Mbit of connectivity through to the Internet, but unfortunately of
recent times I haven't had that it seems.
Post by Ian Batterbee
remember that telecom used to say that they wouldn't enable ADSL for
anyone that couldn't connect to the exchange at at least 2mbps - I
wonder if they'll up that figure, or if they'll start re-laying copper
in those locations where people have asked for 3.5mbps and can't get it
due to the quality of the wires.
I was pinning some hope on ADSL2/ADSL2+ which supposedly has better reach and
better resistance to noisy lines
(http://www.networkworld.com/news/tech/2003/0120techupdate.html), but when I
emailed Telecom about ADSL2/ADSL2+ timeframes a couple of weeks ago I was told
"I am sorry but we cannot advise of a date at this time." .

G.SHDSL would also possibly be better, one wonders why Telecom have never
advertised G.SHDSL though even for businesses, especially given they use it for
some of their One Office/PON connections at sites where they haven't laid fibre.
I've never seen it used anywhere other than where Telecom want to use it
themselves........

reuben
--
This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list.
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ,
and various documents.
To unsubscribe: send mail to ***@lists.unixathome.org
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message
Simon Byrnand
2006-02-13 10:28:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Reuben Farrelly
G.SHDSL would also possibly be better, one wonders why Telecom have never
advertised G.SHDSL though even for businesses, especially given they use it for
some of their One Office/PON connections at sites where they haven't laid fibre.
I've never seen it used anywhere other than where Telecom want to use it
themselves........
They also use it to deliver 2Mbit frame-relay these days....at frame-relay
prices of course :)

Regards,
Simon



--
This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list.
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ,
and various documents.
To unsubscribe: send mail to ***@lists.unixathome.org
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message
Loading...