From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-32-ewr.dyndns.com (mxout-069-ewr.mailhop.org [216.146.33.69]) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4326B2E03A7 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 01:19:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from scan-31-ewr.mailhop.org (scan-31-ewr.local [10.0.141.237]) by mail-32-ewr.dyndns.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF4976FADB1 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 09:18:51 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Score: 3.2 (+++) X-Mail-Handler: MailHop by DynDNS X-Originating-IP: 195.113.20.131 Received: from popelka.ms.mff.cuni.cz (popelka.ms.mff.cuni.cz [195.113.20.131]) by mail-32-ewr.dyndns.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C2446FAB2E for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 09:18:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from domone.kolej.mff.cuni.cz (popelka.ms.mff.cuni.cz [127.0.1.1]) by popelka.ms.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC4FC576B6; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 10:18:43 +0100 (CET) Received: by domone.kolej.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D5ADA5F77D; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 10:18:58 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 10:18:58 +0100 From: =?utf-8?B?T25kxZllaiBCw61sa2E=?= To: Jeremy Visser Message-ID: <20110301091858.GA4446@domone> References: <1298930176.15371.51.camel@amd.pacdat.net> <1298948257.12452.1424819733@webmail.messagingengine.com> <4D6CA21E.2000005@visser.name> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4D6CA21E.2000005@visser.name> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.5 at popelka.ms.mff.cuni.cz X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_05, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on popelka.ms.mff.cuni.cz Cc: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Bloat] Usage Based Billing - It's All About Perceived Congestion X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 09:19:31 -0000 On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 06:37:02PM +1100, Jeremy Visser wrote: > Henrique de Moraes Holschuh said: > > Cutting down service to as low as 100kbit/s > > downstream and 30kbit/s upstream when the consumer goes over a monthly > > quota, limiting concurrent tcp sessions, and extremely severe shaping of > > P2P traffic are used as alternatives to UBB. > > Ha. Here in Australia, shaping the service to 64 kbit/s downstream when > quota is exceeded is the norm. Premium services sometimes allow 128 or > 256 kbit/s shaping, but that's not very common. Primary function of quotas(64kbit/s after exceeded) is marketing trick how make customer pay more and shaping is secondary. If ISP wanted be nice to customers then it could after quota exceeded shape 64kbit/s+ available residual bandwidth > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat -- Operators killed by year 2000 bug bite.