And I was replying to a poster that had 4 users.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

In reply to a post by PCJM40:

Can you quantify what "making use of broadband" actually means? if I need to max it out a couple of times a month does that count as making use of it? do I need to be maxing it out every minute of the day to qualify? Is there a definition of how one should make use of their broadband?

I know you think few if not anyone needs more than 36Mbps (probably just so happens to be the exact amount you had on FTTC) but people out here don't necessarily use broadband the exact same way you do fella.

It is nice having the extra speed if you need it, I have found it useful myself and while paying £24 a month for it was fine, I may as well have it since it was the same price as what I was paying Plusnet for FTTC speed. When the contract ended, and it went back up to £35 more or less, I had to decide if I wanted to stay on 500Mb.s or drop to 150. In the end I decided to stay where I am as the price difference between full price of 150 and full price of 500 is only a fiver a month, I waste more than that a month down the toilet when I go out for a few pints.
If I was in a different situation then yes I would have dropped to 150.

Think somewhere in the previous 1300 words that's the thread and pretty much every other one written on this topic any time recently pretty much anywhere.

But the poster wasn't talking about working from home.

I worked for a .com, many years ago, that had a 2mb leased line. Wasn't fast but was adequate.

But does he really need the extra speed of instant coffee?

In reply to a post by PCJM40:

So the irony of this whole thread is, this fella zyborg47 creates a thread complaining that people have a faster package than they actually need then admits to having a faster package than he needs!! to be clear more than 13 times faster than he needs and paying extra for something he doesn't need which he complained other people were doing.

You couldn't make it up.

Is this the point that I remind him he only needs 36Mbps? 😎🤣 No, I don't think I can be bothered with all the guff that will come back at me 🤣

Only changed because it was cheaper than staying where i was and because Plusnet was pushing me to FTTP anyway.
sure i could have stayed with Plusnet and gone to FTTP on a slower speed, but if I have to cope with the hassle of FTTP installed and Zzoomm was cheaper anyway, i may as well go for a better network.

I was also not complaining about people having a faster broadband than they need, I was saying it is a shame that people to make full use of what they are paying for.

I have said in post before I went to Zzoomm that I was happy to stay on FTTC at 36Mb/s, but I am not paying more for the privilege and being stuck in a 24-month contract.

In reply to a post by cjn:

But does he really need the extra speed of instant coffee?

I don't drink instant coffee if I can help it, I do at work, but never drink it at home. I have an espresso machine,

In reply to a post by Michael_Chare:

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

I have a domain, but I only use it for email, I suppose I could use it for a website, but that would cost more and I don't need a website. But domains are cheap, and businesses normally buy them to stop others using them.

Who do you use for this? I have been using 123-reg for email forwarding but they now tell me that they are stopping this service so I plan to move

123-reg ceased 'free' email forwarding some time around May 2023. A blatant ploy to force customers to pay for an email hosting package from them (or someone else) in order to continue receiving email for their registered domain or change registrar to one still offering a simple email redirect. The PR spin at the time as quoted below:

" Whilst we understand this decision will be disappointing for some customers, our catch-all email forwarding was not performing to the level our customers need, or what we expect. So, we made the difficult decision to stop offering the service. "

They also blatantly abused existing customers with a paid-for web hosting package which included 1 or more mailboxes by effectively terminating those allegedly 'free' mailboxes part way through the hosting contract period which had been paid for in full in advance. i.e. pay for a 3 year web hosting package including mailbox(es) but then find out just a few months into the contract that you will now have to pay more for a separate email hosting package from 123-reg (or someone else) in the very near future in order to continue receiving domain email.

Did you perhaps mean domain forwarding is now being discontinued by 123-reg shortly ?

The reason I ask is that I've just discovered that my 123-reg domain forwarding has suddenly stopped working despite no changes whatsoever by me for well over a year and I haven't managed to get any response from 123-reg customer service to explain why as yet.

Based on my past experience with the 123-reg alleged email system 'upgrade' last year, I certainly wouldn't be in any way surprised to find 123-reg/godaddy are employing very similar tactics in an attempt to also force existing customers to pay for a web hosting package from them or go elsewhere ... although I can't see any suggestion anywhere that's actually the case here.

When did you receive the email or advice from 123-reg that you refer to and what did it actually say ?

Edited by ambrougham (Fri 30-Aug-24 07:23:23)

OK, well it looks like my very OT problem is a 123-reg stupidity or incompetence issue as per bleedin' usual. The original domain redirect server appears to have been decommissioned but the 123-reg control panel is still automatically adding it's IP address to the DNS records rather than whatever the actual IP address of the replacement server is :rolleyes: Nothing I can do ... and 123-reg are doing ... nothing ! End result several weeks of all web traffic either disappearing down a blackhole or being hijacked by someone or something via AWS. Not a happy bunny and all that.



Anyway, with regards to the slightly less OT 123-reg email forwarding question that Michael_Chare asked:

This is not a recommendation as such as I'm still checking things out but hopefully a helpful suggestion: Have a quick look at improvmx.com

I'm currently test driving it to restore email functionality to a 123-reg held domain using an existing hotmail email address which was also associated with it as the final destination. Both of which are of very little importance in reality should things go a bit wrong in any particular way ! First impressions are that it looks and works OK and, I think, has fairly minimal potential security/abuse issues

You just need to change the MX records from 123-reg defaults to point to improvmx. Unlike other similar free email forwarding services (such as forwardemail.net) the destination email address is not being made public via the DNS records. However, there is temporary storage of incoming messages and log data to consider so do check out the privacy info to make sure that you're happy. To all intents and purposes, once the DNS update has propagated it simply replicates the functionality that 123-reg removed last year. All messages sent to the domain now get forwarded to hotmail again as opposed to being bounced by 123-reg with a 'nothing to do with us' error message. I'm using a catch-all as previously but you could use up to 25 defined aliases if you prefer.

It seems to me like a quick/simple solution without having to endure yet another potential out-of-frying-pan-into-fire situation or, worse still, several of them in rather quick succession ! Also no money changing hands is usually attractive of course However, the problem as always is that anything claimed to be 'free' could be changed/removed at any time and without notice or suddenly become chargeable at an extortionate rate once you get used to relying on it ... something that the likes of 123-reg know only too well and exploit often

Edited by ambrougham (Thu 05-Sep-24 19:41:21)

In reply to a post by broadband66:

Out of curiosity.

Surely 20mbps each would be more than adequate. 5 machines connected simultaneously.

150 should be more than enough.

Except for certain combinations of use such as UHD streaming and on-line gaming.

Streaming services don't actually stream but burst their data every few seconds.
This can briefly saturate even a reasonable downstream link causing ping spikes for gaming.
My 150Mb/s link shows 50-100ms spikes with a single UHD stream running.

Streaming HD was mentioned, not 4K.

What speed is required for online gaming? Thought low latency, jitter were the main things for gaming.