🚀 go-pugleaf

Peter Hucker wrote:
> On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 10:16:12 +0100, ah <splifingate@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Peter Hucker wrote:
>>> On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:15:18 -0000, ah <splifingate@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Peter Hucker wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 01:17:12 -0000, Chris Caputo <ccaputo@alt.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> engineer2 <engineer2@the.lab> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I imagine the reasons vary.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> With multiple connections you can download binaries in one group while
>>>>>> browsing text messages in another, for example.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On our throttled connections, although our terms indicate that bandwidth
>>>>>> is distributed across parallel connections, I haven't found it necessary
>>>>>> to actually implement that and enforce it.  Therefore, on our throttled
>>>>>> offerings, multiple connections will actually increase overall
>>>>>> throughput.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In general, with TCP performance testing, I find that a single
>>>>>> unthrottled stream is best able to utilize available bandwidth.  Others
>>>>>> may disagree or have more scientific input.
>>>>>
>>>>> My newsreader downloads using four connections.  I usually get exactly the
>>>>> bandwidth I've paid for, not four times that.  Occasionally at non-peak
>>>>> times it goes a lot higher, but I assume it's not being limited at those
>>>>> times.
>>>>
>>>> That's a reasonably safe assumption, though it could be buffer under-run
>>>> compensation.
>>>
>>> It's My ISP doing traffic shaping.  Avoid Plusnet.
>>
>> I did some traffic shaping, once.  Avoid linux.
> 
> I always avoid linux.

Why?

> 
>>>>>> Some ISP's are rumored to be heading in that direction, no doubt.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ISP's frequently buy from backbones using a 95th percentile method of
>>>>>> billing, so bringing usage billing down to the consumer may be tempting
>>>>>> for some business models.
>>>>>
>>>>> My ISP has an x GB per month for y amount of cash, plus can choose to pay
>>>>> more per GB if you go over the limit, or have it just stop working.
>>>>
>>>> Sweet!
>>>
>>> Except for the usenet speed.  Although I could pay more for the gold band.....
>>
>> Is that GSM, or LTE?
> 
> No idea what you're talking about, they just give more priority to usenet and p2p.

Wireless technologies.
-- 
ah