Question about DSL

[Bob]

The question really is: Can he install DSL in a second home 100 miles
away but in Verizon's service area with one account?

What do you mean by "account".

Each connection - the one at home and the one at the second home -
require their own distinct IP address. There is no way to get around
that that I know of.

I am sure they can put both services on one billing account, but he
will have to pay for two connections.

Some cable ISPs offer a free dialup which can be used as backup. I
believe it would provide a distinct IP address but I don't believe he
can be logged into both at the same time. He could therefore shut off
the cable modem at home and dial up at the second home. Agreed that
the dial up is slower but most of the time it is fast enough for
routine Internet functions - email, web, Usenet, etc. You do not want
to download SP2 with it.


--

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
-- George Bernard Shaw

 

[kony]

That's funny, I had RR from Time Warner (was Paragon) here
in San Antonio, and it's a shared connection, in that your bandwith
is shared with whoever is also on your leg of the cable (Fiber
actually). It was down much of the time and throttled back most
of the rest of the time.

<snip>

Sounds like your cable company needed do some
troubleshooting and maintenance, as it should not have been
down even if they had overextended their customer base in
your area. The best course of action there is to log the
outtages and focus on them. Level 1 customer support is
often just reading scripts, if you distract them with issues
about download speed they'll go off on a tangent instead of
tacking the primary issue- and if there was a problem with
the connection it could result in poor performance too.

 

[kony]

I've never seen any cable internet connection that

I know mine seldom did.

Above is not what I wrote.
Why did you not insist that they fix it?
Nothing wrong with using DSL if that's what you want, but
the millions using cable are evidence it does work fine when
properly admnistered, maintained... same as with DSL.

 

[chrispsg]

DSL has to be available on the telephone line itself and is not
maintained by an account. So you can't move the modem to a different
house with a different phone number and have internet access.

You must have DSL activated for the phone number in the house. DSL uses
PPOE wich authenticates the user on the ISP's network. If DSL is not
activated on that telephone number you will not be able to use his
original account. You will have to pay for DSL on both numbers.

For all machines to access the internet in the same house you will only
need one DSL Modem. You wont even need a router. Most DSL Modems use
NAT so all you will need is one modem and a switch to connect it all
together.

psg

 

[geezer]

DSL has to be available on the telephone line itself and is not
maintained by an account. So you can't move the modem to a different
house with a different phone number and have internet access.

You must have DSL activated for the phone number in the house. DSL uses
PPOE wich authenticates the user on the ISP's network. If DSL is not
activated on that telephone number you will not be able to use his
original account. You will have to pay for DSL on both numbers.

For all machines to access the internet in the same house you will only
need one DSL Modem. You wont even need a router. Most DSL Modems use
NAT so all you will need is one modem and a switch to connect it all
together.

psg

Thank you - I'll pass it along.

Geezer

 

[Bob]

<snip>

Sounds like your cable company needed do some
troubleshooting and maintenance, as it should not have been
down even if they had overextended their customer base in
your area. The best course of action there is to log the
outtages and focus on them. Level 1 customer support is
often just reading scripts, if you distract them with issues
about download speed they'll go off on a tangent instead of
tacking the primary issue- and if there was a problem with
the connection it could result in poor performance too.

RR in Houston runs diagnostics that go all the way into my modem. They
once spotted a suspect connection at the junction box in the yard and
dispatched a tech to fix it. Sure enough there was a corroded module
in the box. I have never had a local connection problem since and that
incident was several years ago.


--

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
-- George Bernard Shaw

 

[kony]

RR in Houston runs diagnostics that go all the way into my modem. They
once spotted a suspect connection at the junction box in the yard and
dispatched a tech to fix it. Sure enough there was a corroded module
in the box. I have never had a local connection problem since and that
incident was several years ago.

Similar problems can happen with DSL as well as cable.
Particularly in the fall when there is a large drop in temp
at night, marginal connections may be subject to drop out.
Nothing lasts forever and they won't go out and find faults
until a few people complain enough. I recall a conversation
with one technician where I was informed that a maintenance
crew would be dispatched much sooner if multiple people
called in, plus it's often the case that a level 1 tech will
start out with the presumption that the problem must be on
the customer's end, their own setup. Having a neighbor with
a fault too can eliminate this wasted time while they insist
one needs to reboot their system, power cycle their
equipment, etc.

 

[Bob]

Similar problems can happen with DSL as well as cable.
Particularly in the fall when there is a large drop in temp
at night, marginal connections may be subject to drop out.
Nothing lasts forever and they won't go out and find faults
until a few people complain enough. I recall a conversation
with one technician where I was informed that a maintenance
crew would be dispatched much sooner if multiple people
called in, plus it's often the case that a level 1 tech will
start out with the presumption that the problem must be on
the customer's end, their own setup. Having a neighbor with
a fault too can eliminate this wasted time while they insist
one needs to reboot their system, power cycle their
equipment, etc.

Warner Cable is different. If I call and they cannot find anything on
their end they will schedule a visit to my house. If there was a real
fault, then they cancel the visit.

Several years ago when the cable was not quite mature, I would be one
of the first to call. Every time they would get calls after me for the
same problem, so they would cancel the visit to my house. However once
the fault was not widespread so the tech came over and discovered a
corroded connector. He fixed it and I have never had a problem on my
end since.

It is almost impossible to talk them out of scheduling a visit even
though you know it is an area wide fault. They have a rich history of
how to keep the system up and scheduling visits is part of the
regimen.


--

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
-- George Bernard Shaw

 

[Bob]

Similar problems can happen with DSL as well as cable.

I ran a test that CNET offers at

http://reviews.cnet.com/7004-7254_7-0.html?tag=cnetfd.ld

It gave me 2839 kbps (kilobits per second)

This test is necessarily over the Internet - they tell you that you
will connect to one of their servers on the Internet.

By contrast I ran the test at Warner Cable Road Runner. This
connection is between my computer and a internal computer at Warner,
not far from where I live. There is no Internet involved in this test.

http://www.houston.rr.com/SpeedTest/speedTest.html

4678 Kbps (kilobits per second)

As it obvious, there is a substantial difference. The whole point I
have been trying to make is that these speed tests are not meaningful
unless they test the internal speed of the network connection to the
ISP and do not use the Internet in any way.

Using the Internet for a speed test is subject to wide fluctuations
depending on too many unknown variables.


--

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
-- George Bernard Shaw

 

[Who Dat?]

I ran a test that CNET offers at

http://reviews.cnet.com/7004-7254_7-0.html?tag=cnetfd.ld

It gave me 2839 kbps (kilobits per second)

It gave me 3919.3 kbps

This test is necessarily over the Internet - they tell you that you
will connect to one of their servers on the Internet.

By contrast I ran the test at Warner Cable Road Runner. This
connection is between my computer and a internal computer at Warner,
not far from where I live. There is no Internet involved in this test.

http://www.houston.rr.com/SpeedTest/speedTest.html

4678 Kbps (kilobits per second)

It gave me 2416 kbps

Now using the one that my cablevison provides it gives me 7007 kbps
What does that tell you guys???

 

[Bob]

It gave me 3919.3 kbps

You had a better route. I should have included a tracert.

It gave me 2416 kbps

As expected since you are not connected directly to the Houston RR
network as I am.

Now using the one that my cablevison provides it gives me 7007 kbps
What does that tell you guys???

You have a very high speed connection - or the test is not valid.

Warner Cable, the connection provider for the RR ISP in Houston, has
different performance connections. I am on one of the intermediate
tiers. There are faster tiers for business subscribers. Perhaps you
are on such a connection.




--

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
-- George Bernard Shaw