From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-02-iad.dyndns.com (mxout-109-iad.mailhop.org [216.146.32.109]) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52E6F2E0079 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2011 23:37:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from scan-02-iad.mailhop.org (scan-02-iad.local [10.150.0.207]) by mail-02-iad.dyndns.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7E4F833AC2 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 07:37:10 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 () X-Mail-Handler: MailHop by DynDNS X-Originating-IP: 74.207.248.76 Received: from azaroth.sunriseroad.net (azaroth.sunriseroad.net [74.207.248.76]) by mail-02-iad.dyndns.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ACFA833A8D for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 07:37:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [IPv6:2001:44b8:7df3:b970:1ce:c01d:c0ca:c01a] (rillian.narnia.sunriseroad.net [IPv6:2001:44b8:7df3:b970:1ce:c01d:c0ca:c01a]) by azaroth.sunriseroad.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A0FAE8330 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 18:35:04 +1100 (EST) Message-ID: <4D6CA21E.2000005@visser.name> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 18:37:02 +1100 From: Jeremy Visser User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101208 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net References: <1298930176.15371.51.camel@amd.pacdat.net> <1298948257.12452.1424819733@webmail.messagingengine.com> In-Reply-To: <1298948257.12452.1424819733@webmail.messagingengine.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.3 required=5.0 tests=RDNS_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on azaroth.sunriseroad.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 07:37:47 -0000 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.