Slashdot Mirror

The issue with you getting dsl is not likely the fiber itself but a device called a dlc read more here You should still be able to get idsl for the time being and it is much better than dial up. Also most of Northern Virginia has cable modems available through cox or comcast.

DSLREPORTS is an excellent web site containing all the info you want or need related to high-speed DSL and cable, specific for your zip code. DSLREPORTS has plenty of information worth sifting through that is much more meaningful than contacting most DSL "providers". You'll find Verizon is rated very low and Cavalier DSL rated very high for Virginia. All around, however, most people seem to prefer cable if it is available in their area. One possible exception is Pinole, California (near Silicon Valley where everyone hops on their @home PC when they arrive home). However, Pinole is not typical of the U.S. and as I understand it, even in Pinole, cable is addressing the oversubscriber problem and most people stiull prefer cable to DSL even in their extreme case.

We had DSL running fine until our DSL provider went bankrupt. We thought we'd switch to Verizon who came and checked out our line and measured great speed & quality - we're close to the Verizon station and already had DSL running sucessfully over the same line for 6 months. For many months Verizon indicated they'd hook us up any day, but as time passed, we persisted, we were eventually told our number was "not in the data base" because DSL was "impossible technically". The Verizon installer/tester and his manager said "no worry" as they'dd personnally make sure the data base was updated and that our line had no problem as all the tests were favorable for DSL. Despite their efforts, the datya base was never updated and we were eventually told it would never be updated, and not to believe the Verizon technical people (installers, teseters and their managers). As you say, one part of Verizon doesn't know what the other is doing, and worse yet they seem to have no repect for each other. This leaves the "customer in the lurch. We were even told that if the White House phone number was not in the Verison data base, even if the installer who tests the line and his manager said the line was OK, the data base could not be updated and it would be impossible for Verizon to install service to the White House. Needless to say, we figured if a company was that mixed up we would switch to another phone company, Cavalier Telephone which works fine and costs less, and use their 768kbits/sec up and down til cable came to our area. We've had Cox Cable running flawlessly in excess of 3.5 million bits/sec measured by Speed411.com, 5x faster than DSL, at a cost of $29.95/month. We note that Verizon rates very low on DSL Reports which we'd consider an excellent reference compared to a Verizon employee. Bottom line: You can believe recent press reports and our experience with 2 DSL providers and 2 cable providers that DSL is fading fast as Cable is dominating!

I'm sorry, but I do believe you are mistaken. DSL does NOT rely "completely on the absence of telephone company equipment between the DSL modems on each end of the line." Granted, each switch you touch degrades the signal by X, but there could be any number of switches betweeen your modem and the DSLAM.

Also, just because you have a fiber local loop does not mean you can't get DSL. Read this for a decent explanation of the hybrid network issue. IF your neighborhood has new enough equipment (read: installed in the last 4 years or so), you may be able to convince them. In my experience with Verizon (on the left coast) the tier 1 support staff often has NO idea of what services are offered, where a certain service is and is not offered, or even whether or not they actually have a pulse. As a for instance: The company I work for (a medium sized ISP) receives a fax from Verizon stating that they would be offering enhanced DSL services in our area, so our sales department happily started selling these services. When installation dates started popping up, the Verizon techs denied for weeks that the service the customer had been sold was available. After many hours of sitting on hold, arguing with rude technicians (IMNSHO), and finally speaking with someone far enough up the food chain to know what was going on, our customers did indeed get their service. </rant>

DSL Reports Reviews on ISPs

DSL Reports.

What is the point of omitting Microsoft's name from the post? It is true that some people have not heard about this story but I knew about it since last week from this link at dslreports. Similar stories were posted at cnet and other news sites.

What is the point of omitting Microsoft's name from the post? It is true that some people have not heard about this story but I knew about it since last week from this link at dslreports. Similar stories were posted at cnet and other news sites.

And there are hacks out there to enable them as full routers, depending on the make/model of your DSL modem. Have you checked out DSL Reports?

As a former Public Utilities Commission employee, I can tell you that the Bell's do some seriously shady stuff. Interesting stat: Average USWest customer response call wass around 5 days before the merger. Average Qwest response since the merger: 5 months.

If you try to order DSL service and your particular bell tells you to take a hike, DO NOT believe them. Most of their line testing and reporting software is based of of network diagrams that are grossly incorrect. I recently ordered a DSL line for a data center last fall. My first attempt to get DSL through a bell started 2 YEARS before. I finally placed an order through Covad (Local ISP), who claimed they had DSLAMs inside the Central Office my phone service runs out of. USWest however, claimed to have Load Coils and Bridge Taps on the line, which pretty much screws the pooch for DSL. They also claimed my line ran through a SLC-90, which is a remote switching device. Again, DSL-bye-bye.

Through some twist of wierd coincidence, the sales guy I was working with had a buddy at USWest. So he came out one day and examined the line itself (not a damn diagram) and found that it was only 11,400 ft. of pure copper straight to the central office. Again, I try ordering, USWest says no.

So, I call UUNet. They offer DSL through a number of CLECs. In my case, I would use Covad and then conviently ride the UUNet backbone which just happens to run through the same CO. After explaining my situation to the Sales Manager at UUNet, they took the stance that USWest might bully a local ISP, but UUNet is bigger than buddha, and they'll take a hard stance.

So, my line provisioning order was personally faxed to USWest by me with a 119 page FCC ORDER that pretty much spells out any Bell has to condition lines for CLEC service.

The best thing you can do for yourself is hop on a site like DSL Reports and get as much information about your phone line as possible. Distance, where your CO is, etc. Then call your Public Utilities/Service Commission and become an "Irrate Customer". Most of the time, states themselves will spell out additional requirements to implemeting service. Then, get on the horn with AT&T, UUNet, or some other company that makes the Bells look like a corner hot dog stand, and explain your situation, and tell them to go to town. Generally, they will even COVER the cost of line conditioning assuming you are within the proper range and don't live in the middle of a cornfield in Nebraska. Your service will generally be a business grade DSL line (SDSL/768Up-Down/Full Class C...And a whopping 35ms ping to anywhere in the country for me.) and cost a bit more, but it's either that or a T1.

So what did I learn? There WAS legislation on the table to make things better for all of us and give competition a chance. Unforntunately, we've got morons.com in the White House now, who seem intent on reversing any sort of progress that was made over the last 4-5 years. It's a complete uphill battle, and unfortunately, Micheal Powell (The new FCC f$cko) doesn't really give a damn.

Remember this next time you vote guys.

Now, about your use of PPPoE and the "Since you need to access the LAN via the VPN tunnel your UDP packets"

You are correct but only in the case of running PPPoE. If you have a static IP (like me), then your Alcatel is accessible from the Internet and that attack will work. The ECHOed UDP packets never reach your firewall (unless you've homebrewed a super l33t DSLAM firewall that sits on the Telco side) because the Alcatel is kind enough to ECHO them for you (back to itself) before it gets on the Ethernet. There goes your spoof detection too. Nope haven't tried it myself yet. Yep it sounds doable if you ask me.

I believe it is significant because all the PacBell DSL rolled out in the first year is static, and on Alcatel 1000. PacBell "enhanced" services are static too. It also appears by reading specs that Alcatel has cross-licensed its stuff to other vendors. Westell for sure (see: http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,658656;root =equip,36;mode=flatand scroll down a bit).

Well, it may have been a slighlty heated discussion here. I am glad you wrote back so I could learn a little from you. PPPoE == protection in this case. Now, if I could just convince myself that the ASI guys are capable of reprovisioning my line with PPPoE on the WAN side, and keep my /29 CIDR block on the DMZ. Nope, don't think they can handle it...

This really sucks for Northpoint subscribers. First their service gets cut off, then earthlink signs them up, now they find script kiddies playing on their boxen. What's next?

I installed a Linksys router/802.11b AP last Thursday. Everything was fine, but a few hours later, my link to the Internet went dead. I troubleshot for a couple of hours, thinking it was the router. Finally determined that the Reflex connection was dead. Called 1-877-FLEXNET. Number was disconnected. Called the local Portland office # (503-248-9366) and got a message saying to call back during business hours. They did have a number for customers to call for tech support (don't have it with me), which I did. All I got on the phone was a recording saying they had filed for Ch. 7 bankruptcy, and were out of business. I got no notification, or warning, or anything. They were up one day, then dark the next.

The scary part is that because they own the DSLAMs and lines in the communities they service, and signed exclusive marketing agreements with many properites, many of the customers they screwed aren't able to switch to another ISP, because the lines and equipment are tied up in the bankruptcy proceedings...

I called Speakeasy, and they say they can still hook me up, regardless of the Reflex lines, but we'll see. The install will, of course, take weeks. Hopefully, my apartment complex isn't in that boat.

You can see more of the bloody detail of what happened at f*'edcompany.com

(If the URL gets munged or dirty-word-filtered, just go to www.f*'edcompany.com and search for Reflex.)

They're dropping like flies... Rhythms' CEO resigned the other day, and Covad still hasn't released financials, so who knows how they're doing. I just hope Covad stays around, if I end up going with Speakeasy.net. Can't get cable, and I've heard too many horror stories about ILECs (Verizon, etc.) and big providers like Telocity...

Jenova_Six

You're joking, right? PacBell Internet Services has, by far, the worst customer service I have ever experienced. I've been trying to get them to fix a problem with my connection (it goes down for hours every night), and not only has it not been fixed yet, but they won't even call me back even though I've asked them to every time. Their customer support people are generally not rude, but are clueless beyond belief and are unable to handle anything that falls outside their script.

I've given up on calling them about a week ago, but I did submit a complaint via the San Francisco/Oakland BBB. No response yet.

If you think that my terrible customer service experience is an isolated incident, I encourage you to take a look at the review at www.dslreports.com, and at their rating with the San Francisco/Oakland BBB (they claim that this company has an unsatisfactory record, and a pattern of ignoring customer complaints).

personally, I expect to see a lot of lawsuits aimed at Northpoint, the ISPs, and anyone else within reach over Northpoint's abrupt shutdown.

And all of those lawsuits will end up with the plaintiffs getting nothing, because NorthPoint is pretty much bankrupt. How much? I quote from a former NorthPoint employee's comments to DSLReports.com:

"Somehow NorthPoint officials decided that they are NOT going to pay employees any vacation balances exceeding 25 hours. That's right, three days!!! No severance package of any kind. This is the thanks one gets after their hard work and dedication for the past two years. But somehow in the midst of all this, [NorthPoint CEO] Liz Fetter still manages to receive a $45,000 bonus tomorrow."

NorthPoint will use up the remainder of their money to pay Liz Fetter. No severance to former employees, and no possible settlements or payouts as a result of filed lawsuits.

One thing that the article left out is that the CPUC actually has some power in this (their gesture is not entirely symbolic at this point). If the CPUC is unhappy they can refuse to approve the transfer of Northpoint's assets (see a copy of the CPUC's ruling at dslreports.com). This would, naturally, be a significant roadblock in the AT&T deal, which is the only thing that will let Northpoint's creditors even see pennies on the dollar. So, if the CPUC holds firm, some amount of justice will be done. Read the dslreports.com coverage of the negotiations between the ISPs and Northpoint to fund a more orderly transition. The reason it did not happen is that the bankers and other creditors of Northpoint got greedy. They wanted to take lots of the ISPs' money without giving any guarantees about the level or length of service they would provide for a transition.

One thing that the article left out is that the CPUC actually has some power in this (their gesture is not entirely symbolic at this point). If the CPUC is unhappy they can refuse to approve the transfer of Northpoint's assets (see a copy of the CPUC's ruling at dslreports.com). This would, naturally, be a significant roadblock in the AT&T deal, which is the only thing that will let Northpoint's creditors even see pennies on the dollar. So, if the CPUC holds firm, some amount of justice will be done. Read the dslreports.com coverage of the negotiations between the ISPs and Northpoint to fund a more orderly transition. The reason it did not happen is that the bankers and other creditors of Northpoint got greedy. They wanted to take lots of the ISPs' money without giving any guarantees about the level or length of service they would provide for a transition.

Here's a rundown of recent results from the http://www.dslreports.com/ speed test service for my Cox@Home connection in Phoenix, AZ. There's a block of really bad times in there where something was really screwy and tons of packets were being dropped. Other than that it's been pretty good.

There's an East Coast server, a Louisiana server, and a West Coast server that the tests are ran against. Unfortunately which server you chose isn't recorded in the log. Times are EST and I'm in MST so adjust accordingly.

2001-03-31 00:10:48 Speed test 2810/285 kbps
2001-03-30 09:23:50 Speed test 1471/298 kbps
2001-03-30 09:22:21 Speed test 2603/285 kbps
2001-03-30 01:39:56 Speed test 1674/239 kbps
2001-03-29 23:23:40 Line quality 0% loss latency 77.2ms View..
2001-03-29 22:55:39 Speed test 216/259 kbps
2001-03-29 22:48:18 Speed test 739/242 kbps
2001-03-29 22:46:57 Speed test 667/250 kbps
2001-03-29 09:49:37 Speed test 2446/286 kbps
2001-03-29 02:56:01 Speed test 958/327 kbps
2001-03-29 02:55:46 Speed test 1798/277 kbps
2001-03-28 03:28:33 Speed test 2524/284 kbps
2001-03-28 03:17:44 Speed test 2746/285 kbps
2001-03-28 03:09:49 Speed test 3018/285 kbps
2001-03-27 02:31:32 Speed test 2394/285 kbps
2001-03-27 02:18:42 Speed test 2446/287 kbps
2001-03-27 02:45:29 Line quality 0% loss latency 77.6ms View..
2001-03-27 01:54:07 Speed test 2398/285 kbps
2001-03-26 02:18:36 Speed test 2328/286 kbps
2001-03-26 01:47:40 Speed test 2473/285 kbps
2001-03-26 00:35:48 Speed test 2377/286 kbps
2001-03-26 00:34:43 Speed test 1990/285 kbps

FWIW I have Verizon DSL but Verizon is not my ISP. Verizon doesn't have Internet access where I live, so I had to choose a different provider. My 768/128 DSL is attached to Fidelity Networks and I've been very happy with them.

One major plus with FidNet is that you get multiple static IP addresses with the service. Incredibly, the service was turned up about two weeks early. I installed everything myself, which saved me from burning a day without billing and my line has been rock-solid reliable since. They also don't care one whit if you're hosting servers.

Bandwidth testers like DSLReports or Bandwidthplace.com tell me that I'm getting what I'm paying for and I usually get about 80K / sec file download rates and sub 100ms ping times most everywhere.

I was so sure that my area wouldn't see DSL or cable modems for several years to come that I was on the waiting list to get a Starband / DishNetwork system installed. I decided to check with Verizon one more time and not only was DSL available, but my number was green! I nearly cried. :^)

currently in SF, my home DSL is rated at 160kbps for $69/mo throught Megapath (via NorthPoint in the past, but soon to be through some other vendor as NP is
out of business).

There is a good, short explanation of what factors limit DSL speed. I know that I can increase the DSL speed to my home to a max of 1.1Mbps, but the rate was a bit more than I wanted to spend. I have not seen anyone locally providing the theoretical max of 7Mbps mentioned in the above article. The only people with that level of throughput to their homes (that I know of) are using cable modems.

Maybe you should try a little research before shooting your mouth off not that anyone's particularly interested in the opinion of some AC who's probably not even old enough to have pubic hair yet.

__________________________________________________ ___

__________________________________________________ ___

Hope that helps. HAND. :)
---

I have friends that get 7mbps in boston. Your maximum speed relys on what service you have, how much you pay, and (mostly) how close you are to your service's routing station.

I've seen DSL get as fast as 7mbps while cable modems get as fast as a T1 (or in some cases, slightly faster - I have a friend who beta-tested it years ago).

The real difference is that Cable modems are variable speeds, a lot like a shared T1, while DSL is guaranteed throughput at the speed you pay for. If you pay for 128kbps, you get it (anything slower is the other side's fault). There are different types of DSL as well, differing on max speed and upstream (server) speed. DSLreports.com has a good review of DSL speeds, stating "A T1 has long been the favourite line to host a corporate server on, and the top SDSL speed is the same as a T1, and the top ADSL speeds are a lot faster than T1"

Slashdot had an article a while ago that pointed at a good dsl vs cable overview at salon.com.

In checking DSL Reports.com, I have found some fast DSL speeds available, such as 2Mbps, but I haven't seen anything as fast as 4Mbps. (almost)Anything that fast(2Mbps) in America costs several hundred dollars a month. Of course there is also the matter of actualSpeed supposedSpeed. That would be very much the case with cable. Though I don't have it, cable seems to be a "This is the speed you will get if everyone else is not using it" set-up, they sell that speed to people, but what really matters is the speed you will get when people are using it. The total sum of all the speeds that people were promised is more than the total network segment speed. The low traffic time speeds are extremly fast, while the high traffic times can be extremly slow. This is what I have heard, but it may be incorrect.

Be careful on the typos, though. Switching a couple of letters around will get you something else indeed.

Not too many happy campers there. The biggest problem is the oversubscription. The fixed wireless technology is certainly viable, but not when you have 1,000 subscribers on a fractional 3-6Mbps DS3.

Not too many happy campers there. The biggest problem is the oversubscription. The fixed wireless technology is certainly viable, but not when you have 1,000 subscribers on a fractional 3-6Mbps DS3.

But, if someone has about $250k to several million to spend on an available MMDS license, go for it! ;-)

My dad lives in South San Jose, CA and can't get xDSL or cable-modem service! So, he just got signed up w/ Sprint's wireless thing. It uses a small, diamond-shaped antenna for a line-of-sight, two-way comm. Also, it's supposedly 2Mb or so both ways, under low network load; and 500k/s both ways most of the time. I wonder if this is the service that works at the high GHz range and performs poorer during rain? Oh well, too bad it's not offered here near Davis.

Time to look at dslreports.com to find another ISP...

Check out DSLreports.com before you pick your next provider. They have community reviews of DSL and other broadband providers, including user-contributed bandwidth and packet loss reports. Very cool!

(And before someone accuses me like on my last post, no, I don't work for them... 8-) )

- Todd

Before signing up for broad band, I would suggest reading at DSL Reports it might have saved me a lot of headache had I done so before signing up for dsl.

You have a valid argument, though people complaining about advertisments is not the horrid tempest of evil you seem to suggest.

The biggest aspect of your comment I have issue with is But most of us have broadband by now

Here's a map I found on dslreports.com, which shows DSL-enabled Central Offices in green and non-DSL ones in red. It was put up on February 24 2001 so it's current.

The map is Here.

I know, this only covers DSL and not cable, but it does give a pretty interesting picture nonetheless.

What's more, the average ping on a satellite connection is 750ms. That's right, and that's on StarBand, the full-duplex provider.

The other broadband industries are also plagued as well: the baby bells are hindering progress on DSL expansion (just look at this map; green is DSL enabled, red is not). The cable industry has AOLTimeWarner to worry about.

I just hope my Speakeasy (they rock) / Covad DSL line isn't affected by this.

Of course, we all know about how Verizon is stiffing all the CLECs and the customers it can possibly harass. But so are Pacific Bell and Southwestern Bell. Both of those companies use PPPoE, fail to calculate loop distances correctly, practice improper routing, and overcharge their customers. It's why they're all in the red zone of the DSLReports weekly ratings chart.

DSLReports has quite a bit of info on DSL providers especially customer reviews.

And, no, I don't work for them, but I did find my current DSL provider (CapuNet, which I'm very pleased with) through this method.

Alex Bischoff
---

And, no, I don't work for them, but I did find my current DSL provider (CapuNet, which I'm very pleased with) through this method.

Alex Bischoff
---

Also, Netscape tends to be a memory hog, sometimes usurping 32 megabytes all for itself (in contrast, I've never seen IE peak above 14MB). Furthermore, Netscape is so notorious for crashing (and causing lockups), that Microsoft has joked about it (type "about:mozilla" in the IE Address bar sometime). That means you won't want to browse to a Red Faction walkthrough on Netscapewhile actually playing the game; Netscape might take up too much memory and then crash, ruining both the walkthrough and the game!

IMHO, if Microsoft can keep things in IE simple and functional, they'll gain the acclaim of former Netscape 6 users. Until Netscape rewrites their entire codebase to clean up the mess they've made, they're doomed.

With cable internet access, if the town is small enough and your house or apt is *in* town, cable should be available everywhere and not just portions. One thing to watch out for is apt complexes that provide NO cable at all. And the cable co likely will not run a line in just for your one apt.

With DSL, it's so critical and sensitive, you actually won't know for sure until your line is physically tested by the telco and you can't do this 'til you move in and order a phone.

My wife and I just bought our first house last summer. Everytime we went "house-hunting", I'd write down or remember a street address of a house that looked interesting. You can usually guess the important parts of the phone number. What matters is the area code and the first (3) digits (exchange number, I believe). Then, simply go to either the local telco's webpage and enter this info or go to a DSL provider such as Covad and enter the same info. Covad though, is not in "small" towns. Even better, the DSL Reports site mentioned above... it queries most DSL and telco companies for availability at the address you specify.

Perhaps you're thinking of this site?

In closing, this is my question to David Farber: When will the FCC begin strict regulation of Digital Subscriber Lines? And when will Verizon be held accountable for their nefarious acts?
(Recently, a class action suit against Verizon was initiated on behalf of Verizon DSL customers)

He doesn't, which was the point of his "Ask Slashdot." There are many apartment owners in the North Texas area who sign deals with CLECs giving them exclusive access to their buildings for telecom services, for a suitable fee (of course). In these instances, you cannot get DSL from your localtelco unless your CLEC wants to permit it and you can get the localtelco bureaucracy to move in that direction. Also, DSL from another CLEC is virtually out, since they don't want the hassle.

Simply put, if you're going to move, make sure your apartment has the features you want: location, price, amenities and the right phone company.

---

According to the standard formula you'll find on sites like dslreports, I should be running with an RWIN of like 500K (terrible terrible latency averages around 800ms).

From what I've read elsewhere, my experiences aren't unique. With the wild variance of bandwidth you'll see on satellite, with latency swinging from 500ms on the low end up to 1500, the registry tweaks are only going to give moderate increases.

If you go to DSL Reports, you'll see that Verizon is one of the worst DSL ISPs out there (it's not THE worst just yet; PSN gets that honor since they're pulling the plug on their customers in January). Add to that Verizon's recent ad blitz (despite the pleas from the DSL department to stop), and you've got a notoriously bad company; sort of like Ultor in Red Faction.

So remember this when you're browsing. The websites can calculate your physical position right down to a 2-mile radius. That's more than close enough for an ICBM!

Big Brother is watching you, and he doesn't like what he sees...

very useful for those angry about their service. .