[SATLUG] re. ATT DSL

[David Kowis]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Robert J Hewitt wrote:
> No it was a regular DSL Modem and if you look at the bottom it mad reference
> to login and serial numbers and what not.  I wound up doing a patch up job.
> The modem gives you the option to pass the IP it gets to the PC or router or
> use the 192.168.0.1 Ip instead. I tried to let the IP pass to the Router but
> it still continued to crash the network.  And believe me I tried everything
> from replacing the NIC on the three systems and as I said before I also
> changed the router from wired to wireless backed to wired and back to
> wireless again with the same problem continued to plague me.  (not to
> mention the gas bill driving back and forth over and over on the same
> ticket). Actually the final straw was when a construction company
> accidentally clipped his neighborhood trunk, this had the effect of messing
> up the DSL but only a minor sound quality on the voice line.  This also
> explained why his FAX was also acting up.  Since his contract was up also he
> finally took my advice and had the service changed. Now since the service
> with TWC was installed his network and internet only suffered a problem with
> a DELL and A D-Link wireless card which now that the Dell is wired directly
> to the Wireless Router all problems have all stopped and he is getting ready
> to purchase a new system from me as an office file server with backup
> capability (A little extra money for me!!!)Now back to the DSL modem you do
> need a login that is doen by the modem (unless they changed it again ) but
> the easiest way to tell is to hook it up to a system eithernet connection
> and start the web browser and look at the IP address 192.168.0.1 the modem
> will ask for a number that is on the bottom of the modem and you are in.
> that modem to my knowledge will not act as a router. It is how SBC/ATT
> manage user security.  

I'm not sure changing from wired to wireless will do anything to tell
the router to do something different on the WAN side, but that's
irrelevant. If the construction company had clipped the Cable line,
everything would be gone too.

> 
>  
> 
>       The only other part about SBC/ATT DSL that I hate is the contract, if
> you violate the contract and disconnect the service you get a disconnect
> charge of $200.00 TWC and Grande is a month to month service (no contract,
> like my Cell Phone).  The other part of of the I hate is that on initial
> setup the username and password don't always make it into their system and
> you can't login till it is corrected, this means you get to be on hold and
> transferred for about 30 minutes and get told at the end of the call that it
> will take 24 hours for the change to take effect.  

Contracts arent' all that bad, it guarantees you a set rate for the year
you've purchased service. If the service is that bad that you must
switch providers then you should contact the company and get them to fix
it. ATT's AUP is quite friendly. I get a line and it's my responsibility
to ensure that I don't damage the network. Anything that comes in is my
responsibility to deal with as well. TWC and Grande both explicitly say
that you're not allowed to run servers. I did anyway, and they never did
anything to stop me, but if they'd decided that they didn't like my
website or something, they could've used that to shut me down.

As for the initial set up problem, I tend to believe that this is an
isolated incident. It can take TWC just as long to get through a support
ticket to do something. And if something happens in the chain of events
with Grande, I'm sure similar problems can occur.

>       Let me know if it works out for you personally I would contact Grande
> Cable and ask if they are in your area and get them instead if they are
> available.

I'm quite happy with the Fiber to my house from ATT :) I have no desire
to switch to Grande's Cable.

Basically my point here is:
Get what you can afford and what you need. If you want cheap, go with
DSL. If you want heaps of download bandwidth and you don't intend on
keeping it up, or plan on needing to terminate your contract, go with
Cable. The differences aren't really that big. If it's an old house, the
bandwidth provided by DSL can be low, because the wires are old. Same
problem could result from old cable wiring tho. It really boils down to
what's provided best in your area. I got Fiber from ATT, because the
bandwidth potential for Fiber Optic cable will completely and totally
own what any cable provider can offer. I have much lower latencies than
I used to on Cable. 20ms vs 40ms. Yeah that's not much in the real
world, but it's like 50% :) Where I lived before, I had no choice but to
have TWC, I was too far from the Call center to get DSL. I hated it.
TWC's customer service was horrible. I had Grande in an apartment
complex. I cannot say that I ever had problems with them, but it was
more expensive than dsl.

It depends on what you're going to do with your Internet :)

- --
David Kowis

ISO Team Lead - www.sourcemage.org
Source Mage GNU/Linux

Progress isn't made by early risers. It's made by lazy men trying to
find easier ways to do something.
  - Robert Heinlein
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)

iQGVAwUBRJMcbMnf+vRw63ObAQpRwwv7B3dIf5fHK+8MKSYGQxOeq5BxFf85zA7W
Kc12djgsCFhjRyxwj8xsxiU+/CxbCGM7govseJR9EQVrQ0ukl+wkvopa7lwXJPlh
wr/tpz3WpwiVkrWrvXcNE4/H2TDquVEZ4XkzsApmVMmhxMVO/hJL+1z/kVHZpVpV
Fi21R0/ccQbZtW5C7coDpNwyrRbFM2fiS3tmTVFIocwtpnuKvjY6Ae/qU8x5h002
i96LHsRvb116BqSiZHXGZ8zPeShPgjKgHHB+SPQWGxzbfqpT8SlG6BiIN4WY4sPv
2176lfYnQTEperN55xgZ/kkjqmJKcVZFMe10tucO5JTKwadakF4dyTn3pRmAucNZ
4pgfoGG4J+JXKFWY5dXezWDwiN/9MlEQQoqJ2XesgJ1E+GA1neIJ7/0b52xth9ep
O+1534MmxpYKFE3BCQbyfizzQ2qVyn55swIeVoTSao6Zk1vp3K1OhHZ08HvH1i/f
xgeK/EfqU8Z8cD9yxCOjwJIxBM2A7LPK
=3I1W
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----