Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Shaping (WAS Article)

2008-12-05 Thread eje
Doing something like that myself. We deliver bandwidth to a apartment complex 
with students mainly. We charge them good because I know they will use it all. 
Think my cost today is not quit 200 per mbit so they pay 250 at least per mbit. 
Then I have another customer that I know will today not use all their bandwidth 
all the time but needs/wants a symmetric link of 1 to 1.5Mbit they pay about 
half of what that bandwidth costs (threw in the deal that we can use their was 
bay to wash our bucket van ;) for free). So today either you need to look at 
bit caps if you sell very much to cheap or simply charge to cover your costs so 
if they want to use a constant 5Mbit pipe they will just have to pay the cost 
and if they don't like it you don't need that particular user as a customer 
because you can not afford them. 

We also have one guy that started out as residential customer a big pain in the 
ass turns out he is making money on doing some for of streaming radio station 
so when he complained on speed and short down times etc and that it was loosing 
him money we upgraded him to a business acct and he now pay more for his 
internet feed then what the bandwidth he uses cost me. So we also can make 
money on him when he makes money. 

/Eje
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-Original Message-
From: Josh Luthman [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 23:56:12 
To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Shaping (WAS Article)


I strongly believe that the customer bandwidth packages should be
priced based on your (or that area's cost).  I think a lot of the
discussion has lost that mind set.

Much of the debate here is thinking about 10 megs country wide
broadband statement, 384k here or 2meg there.  In my area a 2 meg
package is easily sellable and profitable.  It compares with cable/DSL
is the populated areas we don't cover to get the enticement of those
customers that are in our area.  In Nowhere, Idaho (pardon the lack of
imaginative creativity) the options are could be 1 meg DSL, dialup and
the local WISP packages of 512k and 1meg.  This particular WISP will
not be selling 5 or 10 meg connections in the next couple of years or
likely even ever.

Not every town gets a 100 story skyscraper with a floor for a data
center and oodles of fiber passsing through.  How can one offer the
same service when the technological progression of this example and
Nowhere are a decade apart?

In cable's case of DOCSIS 3 and HD channels - how many homes are
capable of getting that 50 meg connection Comcast boasts?  Or the
dozens of HD channels?  I'm positive those customers in the most rural
areas with a country block between houses will receive these new
features much later then that of people living in a city with
thousands of people in a single block.  Every one is in business to do
business and make money.  It may be one's goal to feed their family or
raise enough money to buy their dream house and car or even just to be
able to grow the business, sell it, and start the process over.

All we can do is our learn what we can and improve our practices with
that knowledge.  The cable company is not going to upgrade the 10
customers in Nowhere begore the thousand in BigOCity - it only make
sense to secure the revenue from those thousand with other options
then those 10 that have not other options.  A WISP can (should) not
sell 3 megs to each customer when the bottleneck is 3 megs.  QoS can
do great things but it simply can not turn 3 megs into
customers*3megs.

I am done ranting, thank you for reading!

On 12/4/08, RickG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I have WRAP boards on all towers that provide limited bandwidth
 shaping. I just recently installed a Mikrotik firewall (and love it).
 It's shaping and rules cover all customers. As far as bandwidth hits,
 the previous owner oversold and overmarketed the amount of bandwidth
 in order to gain subscribers (i.e. premium 3Mbps accounts when he only
 had 3Mbps). Since bandwidth is very expensive and difficult to get
 here, this has led to a sluggish network that I am having difficulty
 resolving. Therefore, the customers have been complaining. The good
 news is that after getting very creative, I have overturned some new
 options but the cost is still a strain on the budget. My biggest
 frustration is the never ending question: What will it take? It
 appears that more and more people want constant multi-megabit speeds
 on demand for less than $50/month. The oversubscription rate on a
 $600/month T1 no longer provides for a valid business model. Heck, my
 $500/month 5Mbps connection form Time Warner became quickly saturated
 once I put it in. I expect my new 11Mbps connection for $600 will do
 the same. The interesting part is that I continue to get pressure for
 faster speed plans therefore pressure to make the same mistake my
 predecessor made - offer plans with speeds that max out my capacity.
 -RickG

 On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Steve

Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Shaping (WAS Article)

2008-12-05 Thread Steve Barnes
Josh,

I want to thank you for your posts on this thread.  They have been very
helpful and enlightening.  Do you build the queues at the tower router
or at the edge router.  I have the Idea that it would be great to build
the inbound/download queues at the edge and outbound/upload queue at the
tower to help flow across my internal net.  Not sure how to make that
happen yet or easily manage it but that would be ideal.  Any thoughts or
comments? 

Steve Barnes
RCWiFi Wireless Internet Service


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Josh Luthman

Forgot to mention this - this is crucial.

In Wireless ISP LLC's case, they sell 2 megs, 5 megs and 10 megs.

There is no point allowing a customer to burst to 2 megs when they pay
for
2 megs.  This gives them no reason to upgrade to the 5 or 10 package
when
they're package is satisfactory.

My suggestion is to make six simple queues (MikroTik speak, but any
packet
shaper should be able to accomplish this).  Three residential packages
for
the three sizes of bandwidths and then three more for businesses.
Obviously
the businesses queues get priority of residential ones so during high
usage
times (irrelevant of the time of day) the businesses get more reliable
service.  If a customer complains about the speed, then simply state
(the
obvious fact that) their bandwidth package obviously doesn't fit their
needs
and they need to upgrade.  If you can do this upgrade while they're on
the
phone you know you're doing things right!

If you want to bend over backwards for the customer you can QoS their
traffic (HTTP, DNS first; SMTP, POP, IMAP second, Games third, and
matched
P2P last).  I advise this as a small monthly fee (even if it's $4.95,
especially if it not a very turn-key process).

Note that I am a technician by heart so it is almost painful to write
this.
I love bandwidth, but I also like food.  I need to keep my doors open to
pay
for food!

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.
--- Henry Spencer


On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:27 PM, Brian Webster
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:

 I like the idea Chuck and others have used in regards to shaping. Give
them
 a wide open connection for a short burst of time and then throttle
them
 back
 to what they are paying for (say a minute or so). This will give them
 awesome performance for things like web pages and speed tests and most
 email, yet when they decide to be hogs using technology that is a
constant
 demand on the connection, it won't cripple your network. This in
 conjunction
 with bandwidth caps should keep you solvent until the backhaul
 infrastructure in the US gets more robust, more accessible, and
cheaper.
 Until then you just need to tell the clients the basic economic truth
of
 how
 much constant internet really costs. Comcast and others are starting
to bit
 cap their services so they must be seeing the same things you are.
Show the
 customers your bill for your backhaul and ask them if they would like
to
 pay
 that each month. Even those on FIOS and other Fiber technologies see
those
 realities once their internet destination goes outside the private
fiber
 circuits. FIOS may be fast but it sure exposes the sites and locations
that
 don't have huge pipes serving them.



 Thank You,
 Brian Webster
   -Original Message-
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Behalf Of Travis Johnson
  Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 11:15 PM
  To: WISPA General List
   Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Shaping (WAS Article)


  Rick,

  Just for what it's worth, we are seeing an increase in overall usage
as
 well. We have been in the ISP business since 1994. It was only about a
year
 ago that we went over 100Mbps of incoming traffic during peak time...
and
 just today, we peaked at 176Mbps. So in a year's time we increased by
75%
 the amount of bandwidth usage by our customers. Of course we added new
 customers, etc. but that was at the same rate we have been adding
customers
 for 5+ years.

  Solution? There isn't a good one. I remember people saying things
like I
 just leave my customers wide open because then they will use what they
need
 and then get off, so they are online less and stuff like that. Those
days
 are long gone. If you give people a 5Mbps connection, they will use
5Mbps.
 And now, rather than just doing what they were doing, they will just
start
 more downloads or movies or TV because they can.

  Travis
  Microserv

  RickG wrote:
 I have WRAP boards on all towers that provide limited bandwidth
 shaping. I just recently installed a Mikrotik firewall (and love it).
 It's shaping and rules cover all customers. As far as bandwidth hits,
 the previous owner oversold and overmarketed the amount of bandwidth
 in order to gain subscribers (i.e. premium 3Mbps accounts when he only
 had 3Mbps). Since bandwidth is very expensive

Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Shaping (WAS Article)

2008-12-05 Thread Mike Hammett
It'd probably be easier to use BGP to determine their IP blocks, since they 
could be all over Limelight's network.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



--
From: Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 10:37 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List 
wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Shaping (WAS Article)

 I'm not sure this fixes anything either. Even if you cap people at
 1Mbps, if they are watching a movie, they are using that 1Mbps for 2
 hours constant. My cost on that 1Mbps is $40, the same price I am
 selling the service to them for... yet I have all the overhead and
 expenses to keep it running.

 I may have to buy a Netflix box or an Xbox-360 just to see what IP
 blocks these devices are pulling from, then I will just start throttling
 the entire netblock to each service... rather than trying to control
 each customer. Allocate 5Mbps to all of Netflix's IP's on my network...
 then if people want to get better streaming service, they can pay me to
 un-throttle their connection. ;)

 Travis
 Microserv

 Brian Webster wrote:
 I like the idea Chuck and others have used in regards to shaping. Give 
 them
 a wide open connection for a short burst of time and then throttle them 
 back
 to what they are paying for (say a minute or so). This will give them
 awesome performance for things like web pages and speed tests and most
 email, yet when they decide to be hogs using technology that is a 
 constant
 demand on the connection, it won't cripple your network. This in 
 conjunction
 with bandwidth caps should keep you solvent until the backhaul
 infrastructure in the US gets more robust, more accessible, and cheaper.
 Until then you just need to tell the clients the basic economic truth of 
 how
 much constant internet really costs. Comcast and others are starting to 
 bit
 cap their services so they must be seeing the same things you are. Show 
 the
 customers your bill for your backhaul and ask them if they would like to 
 pay
 that each month. Even those on FIOS and other Fiber technologies see 
 those
 realities once their internet destination goes outside the private fiber
 circuits. FIOS may be fast but it sure exposes the sites and locations 
 that
 don't have huge pipes serving them.



 Thank You,
 Brian Webster
   -Original Message-
   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Behalf Of Travis Johnson
   Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 11:15 PM
   To: WISPA General List
   Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Shaping (WAS Article)


   Rick,

   Just for what it's worth, we are seeing an increase in overall usage as
 well. We have been in the ISP business since 1994. It was only about a 
 year
 ago that we went over 100Mbps of incoming traffic during peak time... and
 just today, we peaked at 176Mbps. So in a year's time we increased by 75%
 the amount of bandwidth usage by our customers. Of course we added new
 customers, etc. but that was at the same rate we have been adding 
 customers
 for 5+ years.

   Solution? There isn't a good one. I remember people saying things like 
 I
 just leave my customers wide open because then they will use what they 
 need
 and then get off, so they are online less and stuff like that. Those 
 days
 are long gone. If you give people a 5Mbps connection, they will use 
 5Mbps.
 And now, rather than just doing what they were doing, they will just 
 start
 more downloads or movies or TV because they can.

   Travis
   Microserv

   RickG wrote:
 I have WRAP boards on all towers that provide limited bandwidth
 shaping. I just recently installed a Mikrotik firewall (and love it).
 It's shaping and rules cover all customers. As far as bandwidth hits,
 the previous owner oversold and overmarketed the amount of bandwidth
 in order to gain subscribers (i.e. premium 3Mbps accounts when he only
 had 3Mbps). Since bandwidth is very expensive and difficult to get
 here, this has led to a sluggish network that I am having difficulty
 resolving. Therefore, the customers have been complaining. The good
 news is that after getting very creative, I have overturned some new
 options but the cost is still a strain on the budget. My biggest
 frustration is the never ending question: What will it take? It
 appears that more and more people want constant multi-megabit speeds
 on demand for less than $50/month. The oversubscription rate on a
 $600/month T1 no longer provides for a valid business model. Heck, my
 $500/month 5Mbps connection form Time Warner became quickly saturated
 once I put it in. I expect my new 11Mbps connection for $600 will do
 the same. The interesting part is that I continue to get pressure for
 faster speed plans therefore pressure to make the same mistake my
 predecessor made - offer plans with speeds that max out my capacity.
 -RickG

 On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Steve Barnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote

Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Shaping (WAS Article)

2008-12-04 Thread RickG
I have WRAP boards on all towers that provide limited bandwidth
shaping. I just recently installed a Mikrotik firewall (and love it).
It's shaping and rules cover all customers. As far as bandwidth hits,
the previous owner oversold and overmarketed the amount of bandwidth
in order to gain subscribers (i.e. premium 3Mbps accounts when he only
had 3Mbps). Since bandwidth is very expensive and difficult to get
here, this has led to a sluggish network that I am having difficulty
resolving. Therefore, the customers have been complaining. The good
news is that after getting very creative, I have overturned some new
options but the cost is still a strain on the budget. My biggest
frustration is the never ending question: What will it take? It
appears that more and more people want constant multi-megabit speeds
on demand for less than $50/month. The oversubscription rate on a
$600/month T1 no longer provides for a valid business model. Heck, my
$500/month 5Mbps connection form Time Warner became quickly saturated
once I put it in. I expect my new 11Mbps connection for $600 will do
the same. The interesting part is that I continue to get pressure for
faster speed plans therefore pressure to make the same mistake my
predecessor made - offer plans with speeds that max out my capacity.
-RickG

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Steve Barnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Rick, (everyone)

 So from that statement it appears that you are not using any bandwidth
 limiting ore shaping at your AP or NOC.
 Question 1. Is that for all Client levels or just your premium service.
 Question 2. If you don't manage limits, was that always how you've
 always done it? If not what made you decide to do it this way and what
 kind of upstream hit did you take.

 I am considering giving more speed but I am concerned about the
 additional cost to me for abusers.

 Steve Barnes
 RCWiFi Wireless Internet Service

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of RickG
 Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 11:04 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Article

 Every SHOULD know that most connections are shared bandwidth. The
 keyword is SHOULD. But, peole only hear what they want to and everyone
 I talk to that isnt a techie thinks they get the speed they bought for
 $50 or less all the time! The marketing gurus have screwed up again
 just like the unlimited use policy fiasco. So, I always try to
 educate my users but they percieve this as my issue and that my
 service is inferiro with cable or dsl. Of course, thats what feeds the
 marketing hype with the speed in the first place. So, what to do?
 -RickG

 On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 1:41 AM, Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Dear Mike,

 You miss the point and possibly so does Josh. Because an AP can
 deliver
 x amount of throughput during a speed test between two location does
 not mean that the same AP can deliver that amount of throughput to all
 the customers simultaneously. The AP's throughput is shared between
 all
 of the end-users. When the AP maxes out, some (possibly all) of those
 end-users must slow down. Some WISPs do not understand this and thus
 they end up over-promising throughput and disappointing their
 customers.
 WISPs need to understand this or they will fail in this business and
 give other WISPs a black eye in the process. Nobody is getting beat up
 here; this has nothing to do with personalities. It has everything to
 do
 with the physics of data communications behavior. Everybody needs to
 understand the true limits of their system.

 Why is this? Because the air is a shared medium. Throughput delivery
 takes real-world time in intervals we call time-slots. You can only
 carry so much throughput during one time-slot. There area only so many
 time-slots (fractions of a second) in each second. This is why
 throughput is limited. Only so many users can be on one AP at the same
 time if they are requesting a large amount of the available AP
 throughput. A lightly-loaded system may appear to be able to deliver
 max
 throughput simultaneously to those few customers but when the AP is
 heavily loaded with users who are vying for a lot of throughput
 simultaneously then most of them will need to slow down because not
 everyone will get all the time slots they need to carry the high
 throughput (ex: video streaming) levels that they are requesting.

 Don't make this personal; that simply detracts from the very real
 technical limits that a successful WISP must understand in order to
 succeed and survive.

 jack


 Mike Hammett wrote:
 I didn't get that at all.

 It seems as though when anyone on this list suggests going faster
 than 2 megabits, they get beat up.  Sorry, Charlie, BA-II was outdated
 long ago.


 -
 Mike Hammett
 Intelligent Computing Solutions
 http://www.ics-il.com




 From: Jack Unger
 Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 6:55 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Article


 So how many of your 

Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Shaping (WAS Article)

2008-12-04 Thread Travis Johnson




Rick,

Just for what it's worth, we are seeing an increase in overall usage as
well. We have been in the ISP business since 1994. It was only about a
year ago that we went over 100Mbps of incoming traffic during peak
time... and just today, we peaked at 176Mbps. So in a year's time we
increased by 75% the amount of bandwidth usage by our customers. Of
course we added new customers, etc. but that was at the same rate we
have been adding customers for 5+ years.

Solution? There isn't a good one. I remember people saying things like
"I just leave my customers wide open because then they will use what
they need and then get off, so they are online less" and stuff like
that. Those days are long gone. If you give people a 5Mbps connection,
they will use 5Mbps. And now, rather than just doing what they were
doing, they will just start more downloads or movies or TV because they
can.

Travis
Microserv

RickG wrote:

  I have WRAP boards on all towers that provide limited bandwidth
shaping. I just recently installed a Mikrotik firewall (and love it).
It's shaping and rules cover all customers. As far as bandwidth hits,
the previous owner oversold and overmarketed the amount of bandwidth
in order to gain subscribers (i.e. premium 3Mbps accounts when he only
had 3Mbps). Since bandwidth is very expensive and difficult to get
here, this has led to a sluggish network that I am having difficulty
resolving. Therefore, the customers have been complaining. The good
news is that after getting very creative, I have overturned some new
options but the cost is still a strain on the budget. My biggest
frustration is the never ending question: What will it take? It
appears that more and more people want constant multi-megabit speeds
on demand for less than $50/month. The oversubscription rate on a
$600/month T1 no longer provides for a valid business model. Heck, my
$500/month 5Mbps connection form Time Warner became quickly saturated
once I put it in. I expect my new 11Mbps connection for $600 will do
the same. The interesting part is that I continue to get pressure for
faster speed plans therefore pressure to make the same mistake my
predecessor made - offer plans with speeds that max out my capacity.
-RickG

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Steve Barnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  
  
Rick, (everyone)

So from that statement it appears that you are not using any bandwidth
limiting ore shaping at your AP or NOC.
Question 1. Is that for all Client levels or just your premium service.
Question 2. If you don't manage limits, was that always how you've
always done it? If not what made you decide to do it this way and what
kind of upstream hit did you take.

I am considering giving more speed but I am concerned about the
additional cost to me for abusers.

Steve Barnes
RCWiFi Wireless Internet Service

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
Behalf Of RickG
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 11:04 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Article

Every SHOULD know that most connections are "shared bandwidth". The
keyword is SHOULD. But, peole only hear what they want to and everyone
I talk to that isnt a techie thinks they get the speed they bought for
$50 or less all the time! The marketing gurus have screwed up again
just like the "unlimited use" policy fiasco. So, I always try to
educate my users but they percieve this as my issue and that my
service is inferiro with cable or dsl. Of course, thats what feeds the
marketing hype with the speed in the first place. So, what to do?
-RickG

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 1:41 AM, Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


  Dear Mike,

You miss the point and possibly so does Josh. Because an AP can
  

deliver


  "x" amount of throughput during a speed test between two location does
not mean that the same AP can deliver that amount of throughput to all
the customers simultaneously. The AP's throughput is shared between
  

all


  of the end-users. When the AP maxes out, some (possibly all) of those
end-users must slow down. Some WISPs do not understand this and thus
they end up over-promising throughput and disappointing their
  

customers.


  WISPs need to understand this or they will fail in this business and
give other WISPs a black eye in the process. Nobody is getting beat up
here; this has nothing to do with personalities. It has everything to
  

do


  with the physics of data communications behavior. Everybody needs to
understand the true limits of their system.

Why is this? Because the "air" is a shared medium. Throughput delivery
takes real-world time in intervals we call "time-slots". You can only
carry so much throughput during one time-slot. There area only so many
time-slots (fractions of a second) in each second. This is why
throughput is limited. Only so many users can be on one AP at the same
time if they are 

Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Shaping (WAS Article)

2008-12-04 Thread Travis Johnson
I'm not sure this fixes anything either. Even if you cap people at 
1Mbps, if they are watching a movie, they are using that 1Mbps for 2 
hours constant. My cost on that 1Mbps is $40, the same price I am 
selling the service to them for... yet I have all the overhead and 
expenses to keep it running.

I may have to buy a Netflix box or an Xbox-360 just to see what IP 
blocks these devices are pulling from, then I will just start throttling 
the entire netblock to each service... rather than trying to control 
each customer. Allocate 5Mbps to all of Netflix's IP's on my network... 
then if people want to get better streaming service, they can pay me to 
un-throttle their connection. ;)

Travis
Microserv

Brian Webster wrote:
 I like the idea Chuck and others have used in regards to shaping. Give them
 a wide open connection for a short burst of time and then throttle them back
 to what they are paying for (say a minute or so). This will give them
 awesome performance for things like web pages and speed tests and most
 email, yet when they decide to be hogs using technology that is a constant
 demand on the connection, it won't cripple your network. This in conjunction
 with bandwidth caps should keep you solvent until the backhaul
 infrastructure in the US gets more robust, more accessible, and cheaper.
 Until then you just need to tell the clients the basic economic truth of how
 much constant internet really costs. Comcast and others are starting to bit
 cap their services so they must be seeing the same things you are. Show the
 customers your bill for your backhaul and ask them if they would like to pay
 that each month. Even those on FIOS and other Fiber technologies see those
 realities once their internet destination goes outside the private fiber
 circuits. FIOS may be fast but it sure exposes the sites and locations that
 don't have huge pipes serving them.



 Thank You,
 Brian Webster
   -Original Message-
   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Behalf Of Travis Johnson
   Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 11:15 PM
   To: WISPA General List
   Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Shaping (WAS Article)


   Rick,

   Just for what it's worth, we are seeing an increase in overall usage as
 well. We have been in the ISP business since 1994. It was only about a year
 ago that we went over 100Mbps of incoming traffic during peak time... and
 just today, we peaked at 176Mbps. So in a year's time we increased by 75%
 the amount of bandwidth usage by our customers. Of course we added new
 customers, etc. but that was at the same rate we have been adding customers
 for 5+ years.

   Solution? There isn't a good one. I remember people saying things like I
 just leave my customers wide open because then they will use what they need
 and then get off, so they are online less and stuff like that. Those days
 are long gone. If you give people a 5Mbps connection, they will use 5Mbps.
 And now, rather than just doing what they were doing, they will just start
 more downloads or movies or TV because they can.

   Travis
   Microserv

   RickG wrote:
 I have WRAP boards on all towers that provide limited bandwidth
 shaping. I just recently installed a Mikrotik firewall (and love it).
 It's shaping and rules cover all customers. As far as bandwidth hits,
 the previous owner oversold and overmarketed the amount of bandwidth
 in order to gain subscribers (i.e. premium 3Mbps accounts when he only
 had 3Mbps). Since bandwidth is very expensive and difficult to get
 here, this has led to a sluggish network that I am having difficulty
 resolving. Therefore, the customers have been complaining. The good
 news is that after getting very creative, I have overturned some new
 options but the cost is still a strain on the budget. My biggest
 frustration is the never ending question: What will it take? It
 appears that more and more people want constant multi-megabit speeds
 on demand for less than $50/month. The oversubscription rate on a
 $600/month T1 no longer provides for a valid business model. Heck, my
 $500/month 5Mbps connection form Time Warner became quickly saturated
 once I put it in. I expect my new 11Mbps connection for $600 will do
 the same. The interesting part is that I continue to get pressure for
 faster speed plans therefore pressure to make the same mistake my
 predecessor made - offer plans with speeds that max out my capacity.
 -RickG

 On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Steve Barnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   Rick, (everyone)

 So from that statement it appears that you are not using any bandwidth
 limiting ore shaping at your AP or NOC.
 Question 1. Is that for all Client levels or just your premium service.
 Question 2. If you don't manage limits, was that always how you've
 always done it? If not what made you decide to do it this way and what
 kind of upstream hit did you take.

 I am considering giving more speed but I am concerned about the
 additional cost to me for abusers

Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Shaping (WAS Article)

2008-12-04 Thread Brian Webster
That is a reasonable thing to do. As soon as people start to use video
streaming as a mass adoption, not just early adopters, the streaming movie
services will turn to crap, and  network operators will do just what you are
proposing. Not because they want to be controlling content, but it can not
be supported economically given today's backhauls. You won't be the only one
doing the capping. I don't see this as an issue of net neutrality, but a
problem of infrastructure. I think NetFlix and Blockbuster are going to be
in for a reality shock when they realize all people with broadband don't
really have an all you can eat, as much as you want, for as long as you
want, connection.

Right now with backhaul capacity being what it is, video is best left to
networks that were built for it. Fiber, coax, over the air broadcasts, and
satellite. Not a data network that never promised full time constant
capacity. The content providers may not like that statement and may cry
foul, but it's the current state of the infrastructure, not protective
business practices.



Thank You,
Brian Webster


-Original Message-
From: Travis Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 11:37 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Shaping (WAS Article)


I'm not sure this fixes anything either. Even if you cap people at
1Mbps, if they are watching a movie, they are using that 1Mbps for 2
hours constant. My cost on that 1Mbps is $40, the same price I am
selling the service to them for... yet I have all the overhead and
expenses to keep it running.

I may have to buy a Netflix box or an Xbox-360 just to see what IP
blocks these devices are pulling from, then I will just start throttling
the entire netblock to each service... rather than trying to control
each customer. Allocate 5Mbps to all of Netflix's IP's on my network...
then if people want to get better streaming service, they can pay me to
un-throttle their connection. ;)

Travis
Microserv

Brian Webster wrote:
 I like the idea Chuck and others have used in regards to shaping. Give
them
 a wide open connection for a short burst of time and then throttle them
back
 to what they are paying for (say a minute or so). This will give them
 awesome performance for things like web pages and speed tests and most
 email, yet when they decide to be hogs using technology that is a constant
 demand on the connection, it won't cripple your network. This in
conjunction
 with bandwidth caps should keep you solvent until the backhaul
 infrastructure in the US gets more robust, more accessible, and cheaper.
 Until then you just need to tell the clients the basic economic truth of
how
 much constant internet really costs. Comcast and others are starting to
bit
 cap their services so they must be seeing the same things you are. Show
the
 customers your bill for your backhaul and ask them if they would like to
pay
 that each month. Even those on FIOS and other Fiber technologies see those
 realities once their internet destination goes outside the private fiber
 circuits. FIOS may be fast but it sure exposes the sites and locations
that
 don't have huge pipes serving them.



 Thank You,
 Brian Webster
   -Original Message-
   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Behalf Of Travis Johnson
   Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 11:15 PM
   To: WISPA General List
   Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Shaping (WAS Article)


   Rick,

   Just for what it's worth, we are seeing an increase in overall usage as
 well. We have been in the ISP business since 1994. It was only about a
year
 ago that we went over 100Mbps of incoming traffic during peak time... and
 just today, we peaked at 176Mbps. So in a year's time we increased by 75%
 the amount of bandwidth usage by our customers. Of course we added new
 customers, etc. but that was at the same rate we have been adding
customers
 for 5+ years.

   Solution? There isn't a good one. I remember people saying things like
I
 just leave my customers wide open because then they will use what they
need
 and then get off, so they are online less and stuff like that. Those days
 are long gone. If you give people a 5Mbps connection, they will use 5Mbps.
 And now, rather than just doing what they were doing, they will just start
 more downloads or movies or TV because they can.

   Travis
   Microserv

   RickG wrote:
 I have WRAP boards on all towers that provide limited bandwidth
 shaping. I just recently installed a Mikrotik firewall (and love it).
 It's shaping and rules cover all customers. As far as bandwidth hits,
 the previous owner oversold and overmarketed the amount of bandwidth
 in order to gain subscribers (i.e. premium 3Mbps accounts when he only
 had 3Mbps). Since bandwidth is very expensive and difficult to get
 here, this has led to a sluggish network that I am having difficulty
 resolving. Therefore, the customers have been complaining. The good
 news is that after

Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Shaping (WAS Article)

2008-12-04 Thread Josh Luthman
I strongly believe that the customer bandwidth packages should be
priced based on your (or that area's cost).  I think a lot of the
discussion has lost that mind set.

Much of the debate here is thinking about 10 megs country wide
broadband statement, 384k here or 2meg there.  In my area a 2 meg
package is easily sellable and profitable.  It compares with cable/DSL
is the populated areas we don't cover to get the enticement of those
customers that are in our area.  In Nowhere, Idaho (pardon the lack of
imaginative creativity) the options are could be 1 meg DSL, dialup and
the local WISP packages of 512k and 1meg.  This particular WISP will
not be selling 5 or 10 meg connections in the next couple of years or
likely even ever.

Not every town gets a 100 story skyscraper with a floor for a data
center and oodles of fiber passsing through.  How can one offer the
same service when the technological progression of this example and
Nowhere are a decade apart?

In cable's case of DOCSIS 3 and HD channels - how many homes are
capable of getting that 50 meg connection Comcast boasts?  Or the
dozens of HD channels?  I'm positive those customers in the most rural
areas with a country block between houses will receive these new
features much later then that of people living in a city with
thousands of people in a single block.  Every one is in business to do
business and make money.  It may be one's goal to feed their family or
raise enough money to buy their dream house and car or even just to be
able to grow the business, sell it, and start the process over.

All we can do is our learn what we can and improve our practices with
that knowledge.  The cable company is not going to upgrade the 10
customers in Nowhere begore the thousand in BigOCity - it only make
sense to secure the revenue from those thousand with other options
then those 10 that have not other options.  A WISP can (should) not
sell 3 megs to each customer when the bottleneck is 3 megs.  QoS can
do great things but it simply can not turn 3 megs into
customers*3megs.

I am done ranting, thank you for reading!

On 12/4/08, RickG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I have WRAP boards on all towers that provide limited bandwidth
 shaping. I just recently installed a Mikrotik firewall (and love it).
 It's shaping and rules cover all customers. As far as bandwidth hits,
 the previous owner oversold and overmarketed the amount of bandwidth
 in order to gain subscribers (i.e. premium 3Mbps accounts when he only
 had 3Mbps). Since bandwidth is very expensive and difficult to get
 here, this has led to a sluggish network that I am having difficulty
 resolving. Therefore, the customers have been complaining. The good
 news is that after getting very creative, I have overturned some new
 options but the cost is still a strain on the budget. My biggest
 frustration is the never ending question: What will it take? It
 appears that more and more people want constant multi-megabit speeds
 on demand for less than $50/month. The oversubscription rate on a
 $600/month T1 no longer provides for a valid business model. Heck, my
 $500/month 5Mbps connection form Time Warner became quickly saturated
 once I put it in. I expect my new 11Mbps connection for $600 will do
 the same. The interesting part is that I continue to get pressure for
 faster speed plans therefore pressure to make the same mistake my
 predecessor made - offer plans with speeds that max out my capacity.
 -RickG

 On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Steve Barnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Rick, (everyone)

 So from that statement it appears that you are not using any bandwidth
 limiting ore shaping at your AP or NOC.
 Question 1. Is that for all Client levels or just your premium service.
 Question 2. If you don't manage limits, was that always how you've
 always done it? If not what made you decide to do it this way and what
 kind of upstream hit did you take.

 I am considering giving more speed but I am concerned about the
 additional cost to me for abusers.

 Steve Barnes
 RCWiFi Wireless Internet Service

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of RickG
 Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 11:04 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Article

 Every SHOULD know that most connections are shared bandwidth. The
 keyword is SHOULD. But, peole only hear what they want to and everyone
 I talk to that isnt a techie thinks they get the speed they bought for
 $50 or less all the time! The marketing gurus have screwed up again
 just like the unlimited use policy fiasco. So, I always try to
 educate my users but they percieve this as my issue and that my
 service is inferiro with cable or dsl. Of course, thats what feeds the
 marketing hype with the speed in the first place. So, what to do?
 -RickG

 On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 1:41 AM, Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Dear Mike,

 You miss the point and possibly so does Josh. Because an AP can
 deliver
 x amount of 

Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Shaping (WAS Article)

2008-12-04 Thread Chuck McCown - 3
I agree, you just need to be as good as or better than the competition.  And 
in many places the competition is still dialup.

- Original Message - 
From: Josh Luthman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 9:56 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Shaping (WAS Article)


I strongly believe that the customer bandwidth packages should be
 priced based on your (or that area's cost).  I think a lot of the
 discussion has lost that mind set.

 Much of the debate here is thinking about 10 megs country wide
 broadband statement, 384k here or 2meg there.  In my area a 2 meg
 package is easily sellable and profitable.  It compares with cable/DSL
 is the populated areas we don't cover to get the enticement of those
 customers that are in our area.  In Nowhere, Idaho (pardon the lack of
 imaginative creativity) the options are could be 1 meg DSL, dialup and
 the local WISP packages of 512k and 1meg.  This particular WISP will
 not be selling 5 or 10 meg connections in the next couple of years or
 likely even ever.

 Not every town gets a 100 story skyscraper with a floor for a data
 center and oodles of fiber passsing through.  How can one offer the
 same service when the technological progression of this example and
 Nowhere are a decade apart?

 In cable's case of DOCSIS 3 and HD channels - how many homes are
 capable of getting that 50 meg connection Comcast boasts?  Or the
 dozens of HD channels?  I'm positive those customers in the most rural
 areas with a country block between houses will receive these new
 features much later then that of people living in a city with
 thousands of people in a single block.  Every one is in business to do
 business and make money.  It may be one's goal to feed their family or
 raise enough money to buy their dream house and car or even just to be
 able to grow the business, sell it, and start the process over.

 All we can do is our learn what we can and improve our practices with
 that knowledge.  The cable company is not going to upgrade the 10
 customers in Nowhere begore the thousand in BigOCity - it only make
 sense to secure the revenue from those thousand with other options
 then those 10 that have not other options.  A WISP can (should) not
 sell 3 megs to each customer when the bottleneck is 3 megs.  QoS can
 do great things but it simply can not turn 3 megs into
 customers*3megs.

 I am done ranting, thank you for reading!

 On 12/4/08, RickG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I have WRAP boards on all towers that provide limited bandwidth
 shaping. I just recently installed a Mikrotik firewall (and love it).
 It's shaping and rules cover all customers. As far as bandwidth hits,
 the previous owner oversold and overmarketed the amount of bandwidth
 in order to gain subscribers (i.e. premium 3Mbps accounts when he only
 had 3Mbps). Since bandwidth is very expensive and difficult to get
 here, this has led to a sluggish network that I am having difficulty
 resolving. Therefore, the customers have been complaining. The good
 news is that after getting very creative, I have overturned some new
 options but the cost is still a strain on the budget. My biggest
 frustration is the never ending question: What will it take? It
 appears that more and more people want constant multi-megabit speeds
 on demand for less than $50/month. The oversubscription rate on a
 $600/month T1 no longer provides for a valid business model. Heck, my
 $500/month 5Mbps connection form Time Warner became quickly saturated
 once I put it in. I expect my new 11Mbps connection for $600 will do
 the same. The interesting part is that I continue to get pressure for
 faster speed plans therefore pressure to make the same mistake my
 predecessor made - offer plans with speeds that max out my capacity.
 -RickG

 On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Steve Barnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Rick, (everyone)

 So from that statement it appears that you are not using any bandwidth
 limiting ore shaping at your AP or NOC.
 Question 1. Is that for all Client levels or just your premium service.
 Question 2. If you don't manage limits, was that always how you've
 always done it? If not what made you decide to do it this way and what
 kind of upstream hit did you take.

 I am considering giving more speed but I am concerned about the
 additional cost to me for abusers.

 Steve Barnes
 RCWiFi Wireless Internet Service

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of RickG
 Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 11:04 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Article

 Every SHOULD know that most connections are shared bandwidth. The
 keyword is SHOULD. But, peole only hear what they want to and everyone
 I talk to that isnt a techie thinks they get the speed they bought for
 $50 or less all the time! The marketing gurus have screwed up again
 just like the unlimited use policy fiasco. So, I always try to
 educate my users

Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Shaping (WAS Article)

2008-12-04 Thread Josh Luthman
Forgot to mention this - this is crucial.

In Wireless ISP LLC's case, they sell 2 megs, 5 megs and 10 megs.

There is no point allowing a customer to burst to 2 megs when they pay for
2 megs.  This gives them no reason to upgrade to the 5 or 10 package when
they're package is satisfactory.

My suggestion is to make six simple queues (MikroTik speak, but any packet
shaper should be able to accomplish this).  Three residential packages for
the three sizes of bandwidths and then three more for businesses.  Obviously
the businesses queues get priority of residential ones so during high usage
times (irrelevant of the time of day) the businesses get more reliable
service.  If a customer complains about the speed, then simply state (the
obvious fact that) their bandwidth package obviously doesn't fit their needs
and they need to upgrade.  If you can do this upgrade while they're on the
phone you know you're doing things right!

If you want to bend over backwards for the customer you can QoS their
traffic (HTTP, DNS first; SMTP, POP, IMAP second, Games third, and matched
P2P last).  I advise this as a small monthly fee (even if it's $4.95,
especially if it not a very turn-key process).

Note that I am a technician by heart so it is almost painful to write this.
I love bandwidth, but I also like food.  I need to keep my doors open to pay
for food!

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.
--- Henry Spencer


On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:27 PM, Brian Webster [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:

 I like the idea Chuck and others have used in regards to shaping. Give them
 a wide open connection for a short burst of time and then throttle them
 back
 to what they are paying for (say a minute or so). This will give them
 awesome performance for things like web pages and speed tests and most
 email, yet when they decide to be hogs using technology that is a constant
 demand on the connection, it won't cripple your network. This in
 conjunction
 with bandwidth caps should keep you solvent until the backhaul
 infrastructure in the US gets more robust, more accessible, and cheaper.
 Until then you just need to tell the clients the basic economic truth of
 how
 much constant internet really costs. Comcast and others are starting to bit
 cap their services so they must be seeing the same things you are. Show the
 customers your bill for your backhaul and ask them if they would like to
 pay
 that each month. Even those on FIOS and other Fiber technologies see those
 realities once their internet destination goes outside the private fiber
 circuits. FIOS may be fast but it sure exposes the sites and locations that
 don't have huge pipes serving them.



 Thank You,
 Brian Webster
   -Original Message-
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Behalf Of Travis Johnson
  Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 11:15 PM
  To: WISPA General List
   Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Shaping (WAS Article)


  Rick,

  Just for what it's worth, we are seeing an increase in overall usage as
 well. We have been in the ISP business since 1994. It was only about a year
 ago that we went over 100Mbps of incoming traffic during peak time... and
 just today, we peaked at 176Mbps. So in a year's time we increased by 75%
 the amount of bandwidth usage by our customers. Of course we added new
 customers, etc. but that was at the same rate we have been adding customers
 for 5+ years.

  Solution? There isn't a good one. I remember people saying things like I
 just leave my customers wide open because then they will use what they need
 and then get off, so they are online less and stuff like that. Those days
 are long gone. If you give people a 5Mbps connection, they will use 5Mbps.
 And now, rather than just doing what they were doing, they will just start
 more downloads or movies or TV because they can.

  Travis
  Microserv

  RickG wrote:
 I have WRAP boards on all towers that provide limited bandwidth
 shaping. I just recently installed a Mikrotik firewall (and love it).
 It's shaping and rules cover all customers. As far as bandwidth hits,
 the previous owner oversold and overmarketed the amount of bandwidth
 in order to gain subscribers (i.e. premium 3Mbps accounts when he only
 had 3Mbps). Since bandwidth is very expensive and difficult to get
 here, this has led to a sluggish network that I am having difficulty
 resolving. Therefore, the customers have been complaining. The good
 news is that after getting very creative, I have overturned some new
 options but the cost is still a strain on the budget. My biggest
 frustration is the never ending question: What will it take? It
 appears that more and more people want constant multi-megabit speeds
 on demand for less than $50/month. The oversubscription rate on a
 $600/month T1 no longer provides for a valid business model. Heck, my
 $500/month 5Mbps connection form

Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Shaping (WAS Article)

2008-12-04 Thread Josh Luthman
I'm not so sure I would go hunting down the Netflix users and tacking on
that fee, but it is an option...

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.
--- Henry Spencer


On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 1:33 AM, Dennis Burgess - LinkTechs 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 208.111.168.0/24 belongs to limelight.  So far this is where all of the
 data traces go back to ..  FYI ;)

 One thing, this may start something, but, why not send customers a note
 with their next bill, netflix subscribers, due to the high usage netflix
 puts on the entire network, we will start charging for netflix usage.
 This will be 5.99 extra :)  or maybe more.  Easy enough to do.

 --
 * Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
 Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik  WISP Support Services*
 314-735-0270
 http://www.linktechs.net http://www.linktechs.net/

 */ Link Technologies, Inc is offering LIVE Mikrotik On-Line Training
 http://www.linktechs.net/onlinetraining.asp/*



 Travis Johnson wrote:
  I'm not sure this fixes anything either. Even if you cap people at
  1Mbps, if they are watching a movie, they are using that 1Mbps for 2
  hours constant. My cost on that 1Mbps is $40, the same price I am
  selling the service to them for... yet I have all the overhead and
  expenses to keep it running.
 
  I may have to buy a Netflix box or an Xbox-360 just to see what IP
  blocks these devices are pulling from, then I will just start throttling
  the entire netblock to each service... rather than trying to control
  each customer. Allocate 5Mbps to all of Netflix's IP's on my network...
  then if people want to get better streaming service, they can pay me to
  un-throttle their connection. ;)
 
  Travis
  Microserv
 
  Brian Webster wrote:
 
  I like the idea Chuck and others have used in regards to shaping. Give
 them
  a wide open connection for a short burst of time and then throttle them
 back
  to what they are paying for (say a minute or so). This will give them
  awesome performance for things like web pages and speed tests and most
  email, yet when they decide to be hogs using technology that is a
 constant
  demand on the connection, it won't cripple your network. This in
 conjunction
  with bandwidth caps should keep you solvent until the backhaul
  infrastructure in the US gets more robust, more accessible, and cheaper.
  Until then you just need to tell the clients the basic economic truth of
 how
  much constant internet really costs. Comcast and others are starting to
 bit
  cap their services so they must be seeing the same things you are. Show
 the
  customers your bill for your backhaul and ask them if they would like to
 pay
  that each month. Even those on FIOS and other Fiber technologies see
 those
  realities once their internet destination goes outside the private fiber
  circuits. FIOS may be fast but it sure exposes the sites and locations
 that
  don't have huge pipes serving them.
 
 
 
  Thank You,
  Brian Webster
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ]On
  Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 11:15 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Shaping (WAS Article)
 
 
Rick,
 
Just for what it's worth, we are seeing an increase in overall usage
 as
  well. We have been in the ISP business since 1994. It was only about a
 year
  ago that we went over 100Mbps of incoming traffic during peak time...
 and
  just today, we peaked at 176Mbps. So in a year's time we increased by
 75%
  the amount of bandwidth usage by our customers. Of course we added new
  customers, etc. but that was at the same rate we have been adding
 customers
  for 5+ years.
 
Solution? There isn't a good one. I remember people saying things like
 I
  just leave my customers wide open because then they will use what they
 need
  and then get off, so they are online less and stuff like that. Those
 days
  are long gone. If you give people a 5Mbps connection, they will use
 5Mbps.
  And now, rather than just doing what they were doing, they will just
 start
  more downloads or movies or TV because they can.
 
Travis
Microserv
 
RickG wrote:
  I have WRAP boards on all towers that provide limited bandwidth
  shaping. I just recently installed a Mikrotik firewall (and love it).
  It's shaping and rules cover all customers. As far as bandwidth hits,
  the previous owner oversold and overmarketed the amount of bandwidth
  in order to gain subscribers (i.e. premium 3Mbps accounts when he only
  had 3Mbps). Since bandwidth is very expensive and difficult to get
  here, this has led to a sluggish network that I am having difficulty
  resolving. Therefore, the customers have been complaining. The good
  news is that after getting very creative, I have overturned some new
  options