In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

It may be worth adding Fap applies as a * to the bigger unlimited data headlines so people don't miss the footnotes.

I suspect the ASA are going to take a pretty dim view unless it's changed quickly!

?? Andrew - as per previous posting, better for me to defer to the technical experts at the satellite operator to get their input which I will share as soon as I have it ?

"NB : as explained in section 1.1, the satellite operator can change the Heavy User criteria under the FAP at any time if in their opinion it will allow them to allocate bandwidth resources on a fairest basis."

Mmmmmmm!

Ok - I will wait on the answers or of course satellite based users are free to let me know the url's for their test results and we can assess if it looks to be working well or not.

I would have just assumed that you would have a list of which tests worked and which did not so you can reassure customers appropriately.

As the poster of "Ignorance of the law is no defence" I would have thought that making efforts to clearly set-out how the satellite service works and seeks to offer fair and equitable service across all users would be a positive step ?

There are questions that seem perfectly valid over whether slowing users down before they hit their purchased usage allowance is commensurate with the rules on broadband advertising and does raise issue of whether the word unlimited can be used.

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/5134-new-advertis...
Then read what CAP/BCAP have to say.

Surely it would be better to market something where users could hit say a 30GB limit, and then be limited, as its easier for someone to understand, rather than something that while clearer than some of the old sliding window systems of the past means people might be signing up to a 60GB usage allowance and panicking when it slows down well before that level.

Not giving greater prominence to the fair access policy on pages like http://www.avonlinebroadband.co.uk/triple-guarantee is something that I consider misleading and have not commented publically on before as wanted to give operators a little time to adapt to the changes in how the service is delivered. Adding a span with small font saying * Fair Access Policy applies would be the minimum, as the legal section is invariably a page or two down the page.

I think it is time to draft something for our main news feed.

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/speedtest/results.html...
http://www.thinkbroadband.com/speedtest/results.html...
http://www.thinkbroadband.com/speedtest/results.html...
http://www.thinkbroadband.com/speedtest/results.html...

Have found some tests and maybe another 1,500 to sift through. The test is working and showing what I would expect, single TCP thread tending to suffer RWIN issues possibly down to latency, and this may be having an impact on the multiple thread, but if these were not satellite connections I would be suggesting the wavy yellow shows effects of contention/congestion.

Do the speedprobe tests provide interval based output?

Thanks for taking the time to look me up. Your time would be better spent in giving your clients a good service.

That T&C term I quoted could be described as onerous in a court of law. But you and the Sat supplier seem to be taking people's hard earned cash and not giving then what they thought they were getting, especially when they have no real other option.