I really do think that PlusNet are going to buy NDO, here's why

Yes, another PlusNet thread! But this one isn't all bitchin' and moanin'.

Not only is NDO's beta usenet server a PlusNet server, but all this
tracerouting in the previous post got me inspired:

<START OF COPY N' PASTE>

Tracing route to google.com [216.239.57.99]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms ipcop.workgroup [192.168.0.1]
2 25 ms 49 ms 23 ms ndoltd1-hg3.ilford.broadband.bt.net
[217.47.119
202]
3 73 ms 20 ms 65 ms 217.47.119.162
4 60 ms 17 ms 59 ms 217.47.119.238
5 46 ms 46 ms 27 ms perseus-fa-0-0-5.ision.net.uk
[195.7.228.35]
6 56 ms 65 ms 83 ms pheme-fa-2-0.ision.net.uk [195.7.224.237]
7 41 ms 65 ms 22 ms thn2-gi-0-3.ndo.com [195.7.224.250]
8 29 ms 49 ms 25 ms thn1-gi-0-1.ndo.com [195.7.224.253]
9 24 ms 25 ms 94 ms 9.2.access.plus.net.uk [212.159.2.9]
10 394 ms 264 ms 158 ms
ge-4-1.metro2-londencyh00.London1.Level3.net [2
2.113.11.41]
11 62 ms 66 ms 84 ms so-1-2-0.gar2.London1.Level3.net
[212.113.0.118

12 77 ms 68 ms 73 ms ge-0-3-0-0.bbr2.London1.Level3.net
[4.68.128.12
]
13 117 ms 92 ms 173 ms as-0-0.bbr1.NewYork1.Level3.net
[4.68.128.106]
14 179 ms 168 ms 691 ms ge-0-1-0.bbr2.SanJose1.Level3.net
[64.159.1.130

15 363 ms 214 ms 218 ms ge-11-2.ipcolo2.SanJose1.Level3.net
[4.68.123.1
0]
16 185 ms 179 ms 227 ms unknown.Level3.net [209.247.202.218]
17 224 ms 258 ms 302 ms 216.239.47.194
18 317 ms 316 ms 171 ms 216.239.49.2
19 277 ms 281 ms 230 ms 216.239.57.99

<END OF COPY N' PASTE>

Check out the 9th hop!

NB. High ping times are due to downloading and uploading taking place on
my connection. Something which could be a thing of the past if PlusNet
take over NDO!

What are your thoughts on this?

Anton

NDO?

"Anton Gÿsen" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
message news:41acb02e$0$50903

> 8 29 ms 49 ms 25 ms thn1-gi-0-1.ndo.com [195.7.224.253]
> 9 24 ms 25 ms 94 ms 9.2.access.plus.net.uk [212.159.2.9]

> What are your thoughts on this?

Looks like a peering to me.

Jc.

"Anton Gÿsen" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
message news:41acb02e$0$50903$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Yes, another PlusNet thread! But this one isn't all bitchin' and moanin'.
> 7 41 ms 65 ms 22 ms thn2-gi-0-3.ndo.com [195.7.224.250]
> 11 62 ms 66 ms 84 ms so-1-2-0.gar2.London1.Level3.net
> [212.113.0.118
> 19 277 ms 281 ms 230 ms 216.239.57.99

> What are your thoughts on this?

Maybe once Plusnet have taken over NDO they can go the whole hog and take a
shot at Level3 ;o)

Or did you really think Plusnet had a direct pipe to Google ? )

In article <41acb02e$0$50903$(E-Mail Removed)>, Anton
Gÿsen <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>Yes, another PlusNet thread! But this one isn't all bitchin' and moanin'.
>
>Not only is NDO's beta usenet server a PlusNet server,

They use that as it's cheaper than running their own news server, and I
assume that PlusNets is better than the normal one the are using. I
wouldn't read to much into that.

>but all this
>tracerouting in the previous post got me inspired:
>
<SNIP traceroot>
>
>Check out the 9th hop!
>
>NB. High ping times are due to downloading and uploading taking place on
>my connection. Something which could be a thing of the past if PlusNet
>take over NDO!
>
>What are your thoughts on this?

I assume you mean that if PlusNet took over, anybody previously on NDO
would then have to be restricted to lower down/uploads. Don't fancy that
myself, I'm quite happy how NDO are at present, long may it stay that
way.

--
Paul

"Anton Gÿsen" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
message news:41acb02e$0$50903$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Yes, another PlusNet thread! But this one isn't all bitchin' and moanin'.
>
> Not only is NDO's beta usenet server a PlusNet server, but all this
> tracerouting in the previous post got me inspired:

Not to mention about the vague usage that you are allowed that is only
mentioned when you scour through their terms.

Paul wrote:
> In article <41acb02e$0$50903$(E-Mail Removed)>, Anton
> Gÿsen <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>
>>Yes, another PlusNet thread! But this one isn't all bitchin' and moanin'.
>>
>>Not only is NDO's beta usenet server a PlusNet server,
>
>
> They use that as it's cheaper than running their own news server, and I
> assume that PlusNets is better than the normal one the are using. I
> wouldn't read to much into that.

Er...they have their own Usenet server as well as this beta PlusNet one.
I'm only using this one for the sake of it, and now I've got used to it
I can't be bothered to resubscribe to all my newsgroups on the old
server, which is probably going to be phased out soon anyway.

> I assume you mean that if PlusNet took over, anybody previously on NDO
> would then have to be restricted to lower down/uploads. Don't fancy that
> myself, I'm quite happy how NDO are at present, long may it stay that
> way.

Yes that is what I mean, and I too am happy with NDO's current service
(if only they offered 2 megabit).

Dave wrote:
> "Anton Gÿsen" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
> message news:41acb02e$0$50903$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>>Yes, another PlusNet thread! But this one isn't all bitchin' and moanin'.
>>
>>Not only is NDO's beta usenet server a PlusNet server, but all this
>>tracerouting in the previous post got me inspired:
>
>
> Not to mention about the vague usage that you are allowed that is only
> mentioned when you scour through their terms.

Are you referring to NDO or PlusNet?

In article <41acf37d$0$50865$(E-Mail Removed)>, Anton
Gÿsen <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>Paul wrote:
>> In article <41acb02e$0$50903$(E-Mail Removed)>, Anton
>> Gÿsen <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>>
>>>Yes, another PlusNet thread! But this one isn't all bitchin' and moanin'.
>>>
>>>Not only is NDO's beta usenet server a PlusNet server,
>>
>>
>> They use that as it's cheaper than running their own news server, and I
>> assume that PlusNets is better than the normal one the are using. I
>> wouldn't read to much into that.
>
>Er...they have their own Usenet server as well as this beta PlusNet one.

I got the impression that the normal one was supplied by a third party,
my mistake if that's not the case.

>I'm only using this one for the sake of it, and now I've got used to it
>I can't be bothered to resubscribe to all my newsgroups on the old
>server, which is probably going to be phased out soon anyway.
>
>> I assume you mean that if PlusNet took over, anybody previously on NDO
>> would then have to be restricted to lower down/uploads. Don't fancy that
>> myself, I'm quite happy how NDO are at present, long may it stay that
>> way.
>
>Yes that is what I mean, and I too am happy with NDO's current service

I did read it correctly then, but I had to look twice
>
>(if only they offered 2 megabit).
wouldn't help me, I'm to far from the exchange.

--
Paul

In article <41acf63f$0$50909$(E-Mail Removed)>, Anton
Gÿsen <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>Dave wrote:
>> "Anton Gÿsen" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
>> message news:41acb02e$0$50903$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>
>>>Yes, another PlusNet thread! But this one isn't all bitchin' and moanin'.
>>>
>>>Not only is NDO's beta usenet server a PlusNet server, but all this
>>>tracerouting in the previous post got me inspired:
>>
>>
>> Not to mention about the vague usage that you are allowed that is only
>> mentioned when you scour through their terms.
>
>Are you referring to NDO or PlusNet?

I think he means NDO, they seem to be trying different variations in the
T&C to keep the ADSL product unlimited but have a fair usage clause as
well. So far it seems to be working well, but it seems that all ISP's
are going to be wrestling with that problem in the coming months/years.

--
Paul