Maybe they were planning on G.Inp reducing their bandwidth requirements?

24 years as programmer so I do understand they are having issues that are seemingly unrelated.

G.INP sounds like little to no communication by BT.

But the rest has to be down to plusnet whether it be internal load balancing, peering/routing agreements or not enough bandwidth etc.

But as a consumer should I have to be concerned with this? It should, barring line faults "just work".

whats the reason for no longer making it public?

this wasnt an issue before so there must be a reason.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

Maybe they were planning on G.Inp reducing their bandwidth requirements?

well a gimp is a kind of slave ,apparently,lol, looks like they got that wrong too

Edited by tommy45 (Thu 02-Apr-15 21:11:33)

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

whats the reason for no longer making it public?

this wasnt an issue before so there must be a reason.

don't you about you but i can smell something unpleasant from here

And now for slightly different topic:

PlusNet accounting:

Couple of years ago PlusNet made mess of their 'refferal' accounting, and then introduced
two part system:
Deduct part of it from the bill.
Pay reminder two weeks later to my bank account.

Is'n it time to fix that permanently ? Surely, it can't be that difficult ?
( I was a comp. programmer for 20 years )

In my case the amounts just about cancell each other out.....!

Regards,
Martin

and now this.

http://community.plus.net/forum/index.php/topic,1382...

more fun now.

And the relevance to this thread is?!

It's clearly commercially sensitive for them.

Name me another ISP in the UK that actively publishes their capacity details.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

whats the reason for no longer making it public?

this wasnt an issue before so there must be a reason.

We did ask a bit after it happened, and got some sort of reply from one of the reps. It should be findable with a search here.

As for the real reason, seeing as I'm not aware of any other ISP ever giving out such information, my guess is the new CEO stopped it as giving commercially sensitive information to competitors.

I'm amazed we still get the information that we do . For a while I've been expecting it to disappear at any time.