Plusnet squeeze the leechers again

Discussion in 'Broadband' started by Phil Thompson, Aug 18, 2005.


    "In line with our ongoing network management plans, on Friday we will
    be applying a managed profile to customers who have continued to use
    an unsustainable amount of bandwidth on the service (in excess of
    150GB per month on average). Their continued very heavy usage was
    causing a detrimental impact on all our other customers, so we will
    take steps to protect our other customers from this very small number
    of very heavy users. Approximately half of the customers we contacted
    two weeks ago have reduced their usage, so we are taking no further
    action against them.

    In September we will again review our customers’ usage to identify
    those using the service an unsustainable amount. More than 90% of our
    customers use less than 10GB per month. We have previously stated that
    we consider anything above 100GB per month for a £21.99 Premier
    customer to be unsustainable. For customers paying £29.99 this is
    increased by 50GB, and for customers paying £39.99 per month this is
    increased by a further 50GB. Therefore what we consider to be
    unsustainable is higher for customers who pay more. These are not
    ‘caps’ or set limits and depend on what time of day customers use
    their service. What we deem to be unsustainable will change over time
    as usage patterns change. We will always focus on those customers who
    drive peak time capacity and therefore we remind customers to please
    schedule large downloads to off-peak times. "

    As £39.99/month only buys ~40 GB/month of BT Central capacity there's
    still a healthy cross-subsidy from the light users.

    Phil Thompson, Aug 18, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. Phil Thompson

    Trev Guest

    Must be all the ex PIPEX users
    Trev, Aug 18, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. Phil Thompson

    Mike H Guest

    To put this in perspective, 100Gb is just THREE webserver backup transfers!

    If PlusNet were a newsagent, they would be the type that sell cigarettes

    - Mike
    Mike H, Aug 18, 2005
  4. Phil Thompson

    Deano Guest

    Even though I'm (sadly) sat in front of a pc most of the time I don't think
    I've ever exceeded 10GB in amonth. What on earth are they downloading that
    it should exceed 150GB. I guess it must be some serious p2p addiction.
    Deano, Aug 18, 2005
  5. Phil Thompson

    Barry Guest

    some months i can get up to 40GB a month i mainly use video and voice
    messageing, lots of online gaming and some P2P if i ever get to 100GB a
    month I shall have to have a long hard look at my life :p

    Barry, Aug 18, 2005
  6. Phil Thompson

    CJM Guest

    I've tried to flog my Plusnet connection this month to see how much my
    maximum usage would likely be. The only criteria was that my usage had to be
    'useful' - not downloading crap just for the sake of it...

    I've done plenty of web browsing, plenty of emailing, some ftp traffic, and
    som bit-torrent uploads/downloads, and plenty of online gaming, but I've
    just about reached 11Gb and will exceed 15Gb by the end of the month.

    I'm at a loss to figure out how to use up in excess of 100Gb per month... I
    also wouldnt have a clue what to download!
    CJM, Aug 18, 2005
  7. Phil Thompson

    Spack Guest

    Deano wrote on Thu, 18 Aug 2005 12:42:49 +0100:
    I agree. Hell, I p2p quite a bit (well, what I consider quite a bit) and
    managed to rack up just under 30GB per month for the past 3 months running.

    Spack, Aug 18, 2005
  8. Phil Thompson

    Spack Guest

    Mike wrote on Thu, 18 Aug 2005 11:30:32 +0000 (UTC):
    You have 33GB on your webserver?

    I've got a corporate webserver here running 3 moderate traffic (around
    10,000 visitors per day) web sites, with a book database in excess of
    400,000 rows with full bibliographic content, order history going back 2
    years, and a mailing database of over 100,000 addresses with marketing
    tracking codes on each record, and my entire server has only 18GB of disk
    space (that's the total physical disk space of the server, not the total
    currently in use, there's a few gig of space plus around 7GB of on disk
    database backups + OS + database server binaries + installation files for
    all apps on the machine + junk).

    And I say again, you have 33GB on your webserver?

    Spack, Aug 18, 2005
  9. Phil Thompson

    poster Guest

    But as Phil pointed out, even those paying 39.99 are not paying enough for the
    traffic they generate. Metronet does an account which starts at under 30 quid
    and offers 150 GB (but the downside is that by the time you reach 180 GB, it's
    99.99 - and even they might complain if you were to use a lot more than that!!

    Many Plus.Net customers are paying 21.99 for their service so the 39.99 price
    is not necessarily what some of those heavy users are paying anyway. Peter.

    [ PS It would be sensible to buy additional disks and do the backups on the
    web server. Your customers should have a backup of their sites anyway, so
    why would you be backing the whole unit up via Plus.Net ? Also, there was
    a post within the past couple of weeks about a 1:1 connection at under 125
    quid a month which might be a more 'reasonable' way to go - no 'fair use'
    problems, and it was SDSL so if you needed to do a *restore* it would be
    uploaded at the same speed as it was downloaded... but it was, from memory,
    only 500 kbps so might be deemed too slow for your needs! ]
    poster, Aug 18, 2005
  10. Phil Thompson

    poster Guest

    Some months ago (perhaps back to October/November) a post suggested use
    of some webcams as screen savers (I'm far from convinced, unless they are
    on some rotating tower, so the same image isn't there all the time) and that
    was causing what seemed to me to be a tremendous amount of traffic, but you
    can find some which throw out 90 to 150 kB/s. It is unlikely to meet your
    'useful' criteria, however. Films from at 400 to 700 MB a go
    could be another major chunk, but I've seen some changes there and while it
    is fine to stream films sometimes, at other times it starts buffering, and
    the option to d/l to my HD seems no longer available... perhaps someone has
    been making copies... I know not. I don't use any peer-to-peer to push up
    my traffic but last month it was around 30 GB, some days at over 2 Gb and
    of course others at 0.5 or less. However, I'm on Broadband Plus so the
    types of traffic I get a full speed are not the same anyway. Peter.
    poster, Aug 18, 2005
  11. Phil Thompson

    David Taylor Guest

    So basically, PlusNet get to decide on a whim when their users are
    unprofitable, and should thus be discarded like a used piece of
    toilet paper.

    At least they haven't changed their buisness plan from when they
    did exactly the same thing with their dial up users...
    David Taylor, Aug 18, 2005
  12. For testing, I gave another developer access to a CCTV stream from one
    of my DVRs earlier this year, we both forget the test was still running
    until I looked at a traffic graph six weeks later. It was a continuous
    35K/sec outbound traffic (350Kb/s, cable modem is 380Kb/s max), 3 gigs
    per day, 90 gigs per month.

    Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd, Aug 18, 2005
  13. Phil Thompson

    usenet Guest

    We managed 50Gb with Metronet last month, mostly my son using
    bittorrent I suspect. Our usage does vary quite a bit though:-

    June 10Gb
    July 6.5Gb
    Aug 49Gb
    usenet, Aug 18, 2005
  14. Phil Thompson

    John Perry Guest

    I've checked my usage over the past 5 months and it has ranged from
    0.3GB to 30GB and I'm on the £29.99 package.

    I don't know what these people are doing, but it is unreasonable for a
    small minority to download large volumes of data and not pay a fair
    price for it. I suspect PlusNet are quite within their rights to ask
    the leechers to go elsewhere, and that is exactly what PlusNet should
    do to protect the service for the majority.

    Good on them, I say.
    John Perry, Aug 18, 2005
  15. Phil Thompson

    poster Guest

    Unless that's a business account, one option for you to consider would
    be to switch to the 21.99 account (there's a fee to pay to do so as it
    is a downgrade). Unfortunately while requests were made to Plus.Net at
    the time they made the new account available in April, for them to get
    in contact with all account holders paying 29.99 or 39.99 for service,
    to inform them of the option to switch down to a lower cost a/c, their
    senior staff (if they were told) seemed to not wish to do so, while it
    is a clear PR problem for customers if they later feel exploited given
    the service they have is little different to that of other users, some
    of whom are paying a fraction of the cost, but get twice the speed!
    poster, Aug 18, 2005
  16. Phil Thompson

    kraftee Guest

    You forget, PN include uploads & downloads in the figures, they even include
    people just 'pinging' your IP & if you do any P2P then that will generate
    incoming traffic whether your actually running it or not.
    kraftee, Aug 18, 2005
  17. Phil Thompson

    John Perry Guest

    Whoops I made a mistake, I'm paying £21.99 a month not £29.99 a month,
    and I know someone paying just £14.99 a month at a 50:1 contention.

    (I was on a 1MB £29.99 package but went to the 2MB £21.99 package a
    few month ago).

    My earlier comments remain valid. Thanks for making me double check my
    John Perry, Aug 18, 2005
  18. Phil Thompson

    Ian Stirling Guest

    I missed this.
    IIRC the announcement after the "FUP cancelled" post mentioned that
    users using the service at 3:1 - 5:1 are evil.
    I don't recall any other traffic guidelines after the FUP was cancelled.

    512K account = 64K/s + 32K/s * 86400s * 30days = 255G or so.
    1024K = 420G.
    2048K = 760G.

    Or at 3:1, 85G/140G/253G, at 5:1, 51G/84G/152G.
    Ian Stirling, Aug 18, 2005
  19. Phil Thompson

    Guest Guest

    If it's a small minority, and the vast majority are not using the
    capacity apparently available to them - why is there an issue?

    Only if a large proportion were using above a limit would the ISP need
    greater b/w - if the vast mojority use less and the vast minority use
    more - overall plusnet must be laughing - surely by their own
    admission they are gaining hand over fist from the light users paying
    for more than they actually use?

    Just hypothesis.
    Guest, Aug 18, 2005
  20. Phil Thompson

    poster Guest

    It was 1:1 to 5:1, I think (obviously more evil at 1:1 than 3:1 :)
    True, but I guess some people on Premier (esp those downloading 3-4 GB
    from the Plus.Net news service each day) are probably at 4:1 or 'worse'

    That would seem to fit in... though from the piece quoted by Phil, those
    paying 29.99 would be allowed 150 GB (ie almost double the 84 G) and anyone
    on the 39.99 account 200 GB (which is not as high an 'excess', as it is well
    short of 2x 152 GB).
    poster, Aug 18, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.