On the tiered service, we do unlimited only, so I can't address that issue.

On the limited bytes, sounds like you are talking about a hosted site.
Totally different deal. Unless I am misunderstanding. We generally
don't do that, except on our high volume commercial customers. And then
we do charge by the byte, sort of. If a "free" site to one of our
dialup/DSL/ISDN customers gets out of hand we will speak to them about
it, of course, but nothing cuts it off automatically.

tom
K0TAR

Roger Halstead wrote:

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 19:03:39 -0500, Tom Ring
wrote:



are not breaking the TOS agreement, ISPs don't care a rat's rear end how
much traffic you generate. You buy a pipe from the ISP and you have


Maybe you don't but many do.
They price their services based on an average user and they have a
multi tiered service.

Here if the average user is on 32 hours a month they don't complain
until you hit around 5 or 6 times the average user.

As I'm on DSL and networked 24 X 7 I pay a different rate than the
dial up customer.

Then even as a commercial user rates are based on the "bandwidth"
used. I have both a high bandwidth limit and a lot of storage, but if
my use, or my site generates traffic beyond a given point the rates go
up, or like many sites I've attempted to visit you find the "This site
has exceeded it's bandwidth limit for today", please try again
tomorrow.


every right to fill it if you can. The only exception to that would be
that you have a maximum number of hours or bytes per month. They won't
kick you if you exceed it, they just charge you an additional amount


Only if you have that agreement. Most I've seen just block access to
the site for the day, and I've come across a lot of those "this site
has exceeded...." pages.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

that you agreed to in your contract with them. Some ISPs may do it a
bit differently, but that's fairly normal in the industry.

tom
K0TAR

Tyas_MT wrote:


"Reg Edwards" wrote in message
...


Anything which increases traffic volume benefits Internet service

providers.

Uhm no... If a normal customer is using more bandwidth (receiving and
sending more email, committing virus controlled DDoS attacks, etc) Internet
service providers LOSE MONEY. They pay by the byte, you don't. Most
customers pay a flat fee for internet access. This is true of most Cable,
DSL, ISDN, and Dial-up setups... they are priced based on an expectation of
'normal' usage, and the ISP loses money in 'extreme' usage cases. Why I ( a
'power user') get nasty emails from ISP's and have to switch often.... this
one is good about that though.

If you could see our ACLs and how our mail servers are set up you would
realize just how much we, and most ISPs, work at blocking spammers. The
problem is that 1) spammers have ISPs that are dedicated to spamming and
2) windows machines are easy to hijack to spam with.

Those windows boxes are virtually impossible to block because they pop
up seemingly at random, then disappear. To stop 90% of the spam in the
world would actually be fairly easy in my opinion, just refuse
connections from Windows NT. Unfortunately that would stop a lot of
legitimate email; also it's easy to spoof that the box _isn't_ windows,
so we are back to square one again.

tom
K0TAR

AM200 wrote:

Hello,

So if you work at an ISP, why do people never block spammers? It's always
the same companies people sign up to. You have the technology to block the
users completely and/or take action after doing a trace. It can be done
here in the UK.

"Tom Ring" wrote in message
...

Nope, absolutely incorrect. I work at an ISP, and with very few
exceptions, we get the same money regardless of the traffic. It is
therefore in our best interest to minimize traffic. This is a cutthroat
business, and no one can raise prices without losing customers.

tom
K0TAR

Reg Edwards wrote:


Anything which increases traffic volume benefits Internet service

providers.

=====================================

Thanks Tom

My ISP boasts something like 1,500 POP presences accross the country.
So almost anywhere I travel, I can access my account just like I was
at home.

My ISP knows I have moved permanently to a different state and has had
to make changes to allow my access to things like newsfeeds etc.
Because he is relatively a small provider as compared to most others,
I have never found one better or as concerned about his users.

My take on the situation is, he probably has many more outside clients
of this ring he belongs to using his services as they travel, than
what our few members use outside of his service.
So, if there is a fee, he is probably on the receiving end if money is
involved.

Being totally illiterate about how the internet actually works, but
being conscious of the local end of the wire. I set my computers to
disconnect if idle for 5 minutes. But at the same time, I do spend at
least 4 hours per day on line.

As long as it's Kosher, I would like to remain with my current ISP!
But at the same time, I don't want to make whatever ISPs phone numbers
I am using to get disgruntled about it. I may be breaking a clause in
a contract between ISPs and not even knowing about it.
I have absolutely NO idea what ISPs I work through, as my own ISP
provides only the dialup telephone numbers we use nationwide.
Although, because I'm here permanently, he did give me a different
phone number to use that does not appear on the travelers list of
numbers.

Thanks for your input Tom!

TTUL - 73+ de Gary - KGØZP

"Tom Ring" wrote in message
...
The only part I would wonder about is did the Everquest trading break
the TOS. Other than that I don't see an issue if they were truly
offering unlimited accounts. Did you run any servers? Because many
ISPs don't allow that as you probably know.

tom
K0TAR

Well... I was doing in-game trader stuff.. which doesn't violate the EQ
terms of service, of course.

And my account was unlimited, though it did have an 'abuse' clause. 320
hours is quite a bit of use, but I would have expected a warning message
after the first month... oh well

I don't run servers on a home internet connection... well occasionally a
temporary game server or something... but if I want a server that's what
co-loc is for.