Re: Talk Digest, Vol 20, Issue 13

As far as ISP's goes, I agree, Support your local INDEPENDENT ISP
The Telco in my area SUCKS.... They are so bad I built a dedicated
wireless backbone from my sisters home to my shop.... so I got a commercial 
cable
modem for hi-speed when my Telco chased out the 2 other ISP's delevering
ADSL in my area... I still use my ISP's mail server and there co-lo's for my
webservers. My Dial Up ISP is so easy to work with it is not funny.....

Also not all ISP's are the same... That Telco that chased out the competing
ISP's in my area also cost me big buck several years ago...
http://users.adelphia.net/~franksradio/

Franklin S. Werren  www.bagpipes.net   www.chautauqualake.net

My 2 cents: Never get caught between an ISP and a telco in a pissing match!!
                   The customer looses every time!!!

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "ChrisNGne" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 9:55 AM
Subject: RE: Talk Digest, Vol 20, Issue 13


> Right on Jared!  Support a local ISP, there are literally hundreds to 
> choose
> from.  I work at an ISP in Olympia, unfortuanately have Comcast at home, 
> and
> everything Jared says is dead on.  Dejan, I strongly recommend you stick
> with a local ISP that has the flexibility and know how to give you what 
> you
> want and provide you with quality support.  I've spent years working with
> Qwest and I can attest to the quality of their ATM network, but their
> customer service has been lacking in my experience.  Please, remember to
> look deeper than the bottom line before you make your decision.
>
> -Christopher Hunt
> ReachONE Internet
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
> [email protected]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 6:32 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Talk Digest, Vol 20, Issue 13
>
> Send Talk mailing list submissions to
> [email protected]
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://seattlewireless.net/mailman/listinfo/talk
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> [email protected]
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> [email protected]
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
> "Re: Contents of Talk digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. RE: VoIP public payphones (Casey Halverson)
>   2. OT: QWest experiences??? (Dejan Nikic)
>   3. Re: OT: QWest experiences??? (Devine Madness)
>   4. Re: OT: QWest experiences??? (Jared B. Reimer)
>   5. RE: Qwest experiences??? (Ken Meyer)
>   6. RE: QWest experiences??? (Casey Halverson)
>   7. Re: OT: QWest experiences??? (Steve Herber)
>   8. Re: OT: QWest experiences??? (Jared B. Reimer)
>   9. Re: OT: QWest experiences??? (Dejan Nikic)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:35:11 -0700
> From: "Casey Halverson" <[email protected]>
> Subject: RE: VoIP public payphones
> To: "SeattleWireless Talk List" <[email protected]>
> Message-ID:
> <[email protected]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> What if you were to contact a telecom company that does payphones, and 
> offer
> them the space, as well as the PSTN link/backhaul?
>
> While my knowledge is limited in regards to payphones, I am certain they 
> can
> handle a POTS handoff (which is what you'd be giving them).  The only 
> trick
> there would be accounting.
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [email protected]
>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tyler van
>> Houwelingen
>> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 9:20 AM
>> To: SeattleWireless Talk List
>> Subject: Re: VoIP public payphones
>>
>> how would you go about setting it up?  the only problem I see is the
>> collection of payments, especially coins.  I guess maybe I could
>> convert an
>> existing pay phone?   It would be easier just to setup a free
>> phone, but
>> that would create some issues as well.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 20:11:30 -0700
> From: Dejan Nikic <[email protected]>
> Subject: OT: QWest experiences???
> To: SeattleWireless Talk List <[email protected]>
> Message-ID: <1113880290.13894.1.camel@localhost>
> Content-Type: text/plain
>
> Hey,
>
> I'm on Speakeasy's DSL line now and I'm thinking of switching to QWEST
> mostly due to their higher upload speed (896k).  I'm wondering what your
> experiences with them are and do you acctually get this speed or something
> much lover like 256k or so?  Also how are their uptimes and such.
>
> Thank you.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 20:55:24 -0700
> From: Devine Madness <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: OT: QWest experiences???
> To: SeattleWireless Talk List <[email protected]>
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
>
> You get what you pay for, I personally hate dealing with qwest for 
> anything,
> but I can't say that I have heard any horror stories per say, but I know
> many who have the same opinion about qwest. I would read the fine print
> about what they are promising.
>
> walmart pricing gets you walmart quality.
>
> On Apr 18, 2005, at 8:11 PM, Dejan Nikic wrote:
>
>> Hey,
>>
>> I'm on Speakeasy's DSL line now and I'm thinking of switching to QWEST
>> mostly due to their higher upload speed (896k).  I'm wondering what
>> your experiences with them are and do you acctually get this speed or
>> something much lover like 256k or so?  Also how are their uptimes and
>> such.
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://seattlewireless.net/mailman/listinfo/talk
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 21:02:54 -0700
> From: "Jared B. Reimer" <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: OT: QWest experiences???
> To: SeattleWireless Talk List <[email protected]>
> Message-ID: <p06210251be8a324d88a1@[192.168.0.100]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
>
> FWIW, we (oz.net) have thousands of customers using Qwest DSL and it is a
> very good thing for the overwhelming majority.  Very fast and extremely
> reliable in my experience.  Just make sure you don't sign on with MSN - 
> pick
> an independent ISP (there are many to choose from) and deal with Qwest as
> little as humanly possible.  FYI, Qwest is reportedly going to offer a
> high-speed DSL product (up to 5 or 7 Mbps
> downstream) in the next month or two at a sub-$40/mo price-point exclusive
> of ISP charges - this should be interesting to see.  (Of course, YMMV
> depending on loop length & quality...) -- Jared
>
>
> At 8:55 PM -0700 4/18/05, Devine Madness wrote:
>>You get what you pay for, I personally hate dealing with qwest for
>>anything, but I can't say that I have heard any horror stories per say,
>>but I know many who have the same opinion about qwest. I would read the
>>fine print about what they are promising.
>>
>>walmart pricing gets you walmart quality.
>>
>>On Apr 18, 2005, at 8:11 PM, Dejan Nikic wrote:
>>
>>>Hey,
>>>
>>>I'm on Speakeasy's DSL line now and I'm thinking of switching to QWEST
>>>mostly due to their higher upload speed (896k).  I'm wondering what
>>>your experiences with them are and do you acctually get this speed or
>>>something much lover like 256k or so?  Also how are their uptimes and
>>>such.
>>>
>>>Thank you.
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Talk mailing list
>>>[email protected]
>>>http://seattlewireless.net/mailman/listinfo/talk
>>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Talk mailing list
>>[email protected]
>>http://seattlewireless.net/mailman/listinfo/talk
>
>
> --
> Jared B. Reimer <[email protected]>
> The River Internet Access Co.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 21:21:33 -0700
> From: "Ken Meyer" <[email protected]>
> Subject: RE: Qwest experiences???
> To: "SeattleWireless Talk List" <[email protected]>
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Well, if you are using Speakeasy, you may hop on Covad's network at the CO
> (are they still using Covad?) instead of on Qwest's, but it seems to me 
> that
> the ugliness is more likely to be in the so called "local loop", between 
> you
> and the CO, which is Qwest either way, is it not?  As far as dealing with
> morons is concerned, find a good one at the head end and ask for his/her
> name.
>
> How's zat?
>
> Ken Meyer
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of Dejan Nikic
> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 8:12 PM
> To: SeattleWireless Talk List
>
> Subject: OT: QWest experiences???
>
> Hey,
>
> I'm on Speakeasy's DSL line now and I'm thinking of switching to QWEST
> mostly due to their higher upload speed (896k).  I'm wondering what your
> experiences with them are and do you acctually get this speed or
> something much lover like 256k or so?  Also how are their uptimes and
> such.
>
> Thank you.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://seattlewireless.net/mailman/listinfo/talk
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 21:43:48 -0700
> From: "Casey Halverson" <[email protected]>
> Subject: RE: QWest experiences???
> To: "SeattleWireless Talk List" <[email protected]>
> Message-ID:
> <[email protected]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> I have qwest.net DSL.
>
> I ordered the 1.5 meg service, and my line is actually provisioned at
> 1536Kbps / 1024Kbps.  They pretty much give you whatever upload speed
> your loop can handle.
>
> You can take that $28 loop to your own DSL provider, or qwest.net.
> Qwest.net is dirt cheap.  Over the last couple of years, my ISP rate has
> ranged from 6.99 to 8.99/mo.
>
> I can do full rate upload and download.  Uptimes are very good, although
> I am not particular fond of my actiontec modem.  It's a POS.
>
> You could say stupid crap like "you get what you pay for", but then we
> all realize that the LEC can totally undercut everybody, because they
> can.  They own all the infrastructure, DSLAMs, and even their own
> backbone.  ATM cells are ATM cells ... and it really doesn't matter if
> they go to oz.net or qwest.net
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dejan Nikic
> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 8:12 PM
> To: SeattleWireless Talk List
> Subject: OT: QWest experiences???
>
> Hey,
>
> I'm on Speakeasy's DSL line now and I'm thinking of switching to QWEST
> mostly due to their higher upload speed (896k).  I'm wondering what your
> experiences with them are and do you acctually get this speed or
> something much lover like 256k or so?  Also how are their uptimes and
> such.
>
> Thank you.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://seattlewireless.net/mailman/listinfo/talk
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 23:31:51 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Steve Herber <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: OT: QWest experiences???
> To: "Jared B. Reimer" <[email protected]>
> Cc: SeattleWireless Talk List <[email protected]>
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>
> What would the ISP charges be, from oz.net, to support this new high-speed
> Qwest product?  I have been a very satisfied 256/256 Qwest/oz.net DSL
> customer for ages and have been considering a speed upgrade.  This sound
> like a real winner If the total price is not too high.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -- 
> Steve Herber [email protected] work: 206-221-7262
> Security Engineer, UW Medicine, IT Services home: 425-454-2399
>
> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005, Jared B. Reimer wrote:
>
>> FWIW, we (oz.net) have thousands of customers using Qwest DSL and it
>> is a very good thing for the overwhelming majority.  Very fast and
>> extremely reliable in my experience.  Just make sure you don't sign
>> on with MSN - pick an independent ISP (there are many to choose from)
>> and deal with Qwest as little as humanly possible.  FYI, Qwest is
>> reportedly going to offer a high-speed DSL product (up to 5 or 7 Mbps
>> downstream) in the next month or two at a sub-$40/mo price-point
>> exclusive of ISP charges - this should be interesting to see.  (Of
>> course, YMMV depending on loop length & quality...) -- Jared
>>
>>
>> At 8:55 PM -0700 4/18/05, Devine Madness wrote:
>> >You get what you pay for, I personally hate dealing with qwest for
>> >anything, but I can't say that I have heard any horror stories per
>> >say, but I know many who have the same opinion about qwest. I would
>> >read the fine print about what they are promising.
>> >
>> >walmart pricing gets you walmart quality.
>> >
>> >On Apr 18, 2005, at 8:11 PM, Dejan Nikic wrote:
>> >
>> >>Hey,
>> >>
>> >>I'm on Speakeasy's DSL line now and I'm thinking of switching to QWEST
>> >>mostly due to their higher upload speed (896k).  I'm wondering what 
>> >>your
>> >>experiences with them are and do you acctually get this speed or
>> >>something much lover like 256k or so?  Also how are their uptimes and
>> >>such.
>> >>
>> >>Thank you.
>> >>
>> >>_______________________________________________
>> >>Talk mailing list
>> >>[email protected]
>> >>http://seattlewireless.net/mailman/listinfo/talk
>> >>
>> >
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >Talk mailing list
>> >[email protected]
>> >http://seattlewireless.net/mailman/listinfo/talk
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 06:23:46 -0700
> From: "Jared B. Reimer" <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: OT: QWest experiences???
> To: Steve Herber <[email protected]>
> Cc: SeattleWireless Talk List <[email protected]>
> Message-ID: <p06210202be8ab16bffdb@[192.168.0.100]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
>
> At 11:31 PM -0700 4/18/05, Steve Herber wrote:
>>What would the ISP charges be, from oz.net, to support this new high-speed
>>Qwest product?  I have been a very satisfied 256/256 Qwest/oz.net DSL
>>customer for ages and have been considering a speed upgrade.  This sound
>>like a real winner If the total price is not too high.
>
>
> I think most independent ISPs charge about the same for access these
> days, which is to say around $20, exclusive of the DSL loop itself.
> (Pricing is typically on the ISP's website, e.g. www.oz.net in our
> case.  We don't charge more for the 1.5Mbps product; I don't think
> most others do, either.)  Typically, the big variables in pricing are
> (1) quality of customer service and (2) quality of network.
> Speakeasy, for example, has built a great business by emphasizing
> those two points and charging a reasonable premium for it.
>
> From my point of view, one key reason to avoid the Qwest+MSN combo
> meal is that they take ownership of your DSL line, making it
> impossible to switch ISPs without physically disconnecting the DSL
> circuit and ordering a new one.  This process can take days, and
> reportedly up to two weeks, during which time you are without access.
> By contrast, if you use an independent ISP and are not happy with the
> service, you can typically call Qwest and switch service providers
> with only a trivial amount of downtime as they swing your PVC to a
> different ISP.
>
> Someone recently remarked that 'ATM cells are ATM cells' and implied
> that the ISP portion of the service isn't really relevant.  I need to
> clarify this point, as it is not as simple as it may appear.  First
> of all, the ISP has to choose how much bandwidth to provision to the
> downstream user on the ATM side.  It is not a flat rate service -
> ISPs are given the option (by Qwest) to buy as much or as little as
> we'd like, in 3 Mbps increments.  Likewise, the ISP you use has a
> choice of upstream transit providers, some of which are great and
> some of which are less than great.  Again, they have to make a
> business decision as to which transit providers they use, and how
> much they oversubscribe that bandwidth, as well.
>
> Frankly, those two issues alone have as much or more to do with the
> real-world performance you'll see as the speed your DSL modem
> connects to the DSLAM at -- if the ISP is massively oversubscribed on
> either side of the network, you may not be able to get anywhere near
> the speeds you are expecting.  Other ISP-related issues such as DNS
> server performance and local content caching (e.g. Akamai) can also
> make a big difference in terms of your actual experience.
>
> Consider the cable modem scenario, where the network is massively
> oversubscribed, the ISP has zero incentive to improve it (because
> there is no meaningful competition in many of those markets), and the
> connection itself is shared amongst hundreds of users, any one of
> whom can effectively monopolize it if they behave badly.  This is why
> the advertising by Comcast and others is so terribly misleading -
> they imply that DSL is slower, but fail to footnote the fact that the
> maximum possible speeds they are promoting are not ones you will
> receive at the times you want them most.
>
> -- Jared
>
> -- 
> Jared B. Reimer <[email protected]>
> The River Internet Access Co.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 06:31:50 -0700
> From: Dejan Nikic <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: OT: QWest experiences???
> To: SeattleWireless Talk List <[email protected]>
> Message-ID: <1113917510.14227.1.camel@localhost>
> Content-Type: text/plain
>
> Well I was thinking of going with QWest.net deal since they are only
> $9.99 and I don't need all the extra features (e-mail, webspace, ...)
> all I need is a static IP and I'm ready to go.  Only problem I have so
> far is that the downtime will be at least a week to switch and the fact
> that I need to purchase a new modem.
>
>
> On Tue, 2005-04-19 at 06:23 -0700, Jared B. Reimer wrote:
>> At 11:31 PM -0700 4/18/05, Steve Herber wrote:
>> >What would the ISP charges be, from oz.net, to support this new
> high-speed
>> >Qwest product?  I have been a very satisfied 256/256 Qwest/oz.net DSL
>> >customer for ages and have been considering a speed upgrade.  This sound
>> >like a real winner If the total price is not too high.
>>
>>
>> I think most independent ISPs charge about the same for access these
>> days, which is to say around $20, exclusive of the DSL loop itself.
>> (Pricing is typically on the ISP's website, e.g. www.oz.net in our
>> case.  We don't charge more for the 1.5Mbps product; I don't think
>> most others do, either.)  Typically, the big variables in pricing are
>> (1) quality of customer service and (2) quality of network.
>> Speakeasy, for example, has built a great business by emphasizing
>> those two points and charging a reasonable premium for it.
>>
>>  From my point of view, one key reason to avoid the Qwest+MSN combo
>> meal is that they take ownership of your DSL line, making it
>> impossible to switch ISPs without physically disconnecting the DSL
>> circuit and ordering a new one.  This process can take days, and
>> reportedly up to two weeks, during which time you are without access.
>> By contrast, if you use an independent ISP and are not happy with the
>> service, you can typically call Qwest and switch service providers
>> with only a trivial amount of downtime as they swing your PVC to a
>> different ISP.
>>
>> Someone recently remarked that 'ATM cells are ATM cells' and implied
>> that the ISP portion of the service isn't really relevant.  I need to
>> clarify this point, as it is not as simple as it may appear.  First
>> of all, the ISP has to choose how much bandwidth to provision to the
>> downstream user on the ATM side.  It is not a flat rate service -
>> ISPs are given the option (by Qwest) to buy as much or as little as
>> we'd like, in 3 Mbps increments.  Likewise, the ISP you use has a
>> choice of upstream transit providers, some of which are great and
>> some of which are less than great.  Again, they have to make a
>> business decision as to which transit providers they use, and how
>> much they oversubscribe that bandwidth, as well.
>>
>> Frankly, those two issues alone have as much or more to do with the
>> real-world performance you'll see as the speed your DSL modem
>> connects to the DSLAM at -- if the ISP is massively oversubscribed on
>> either side of the network, you may not be able to get anywhere near
>> the speeds you are expecting.  Other ISP-related issues such as DNS
>> server performance and local content caching (e.g. Akamai) can also
>> make a big difference in terms of your actual experience.
>>
>> Consider the cable modem scenario, where the network is massively
>> oversubscribed, the ISP has zero incentive to improve it (because
>> there is no meaningful competition in many of those markets), and the
>> connection itself is shared amongst hundreds of users, any one of
>> whom can effectively monopolize it if they behave badly.  This is why
>> the advertising by Comcast and others is so terribly misleading -
>> they imply that DSL is slower, but fail to footnote the fact that the
>> maximum possible speeds they are promoting are not ones you will
>> receive at the times you want them most.
>>
>> -- Jared
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://seattlewireless.net/mailman/listinfo/talk
>
>
> End of Talk Digest, Vol 20, Issue 13
> ************************************
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://seattlewireless.net/mailman/listinfo/talk
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.17 - Release Date: 4/19/2005
> 



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.17 - Release Date: 4/19/2005

_______________________________________________
Talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://seattlewireless.net/mailman/listinfo/talk