« Friday article links | Main | Monday article links »

Friday, July 18, 2008


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Hi Raghav,Thanks! I'm always happy to hear that my work is beineitnfg other developers :-)The Brightcove .NET MAPI Wrapper should be able to retrieve custom fields for your videos. Check out the example I just added to the wiki: If that doesn't work for some reason, please open an issue on Github and post the exact code that is failing along with any error messages so that I may reproduce and debug the issue: Thanks!Regards,Dave


Was this review huepfll to you?/FeaturesPriceSupportOverallDoteasy engages in illegal billing and business practices. They will charge your cancelled account without consent. They do not follow ICANN policies be warned. I worked there, and I was DISGUSTED at how I had to lie to customers and basically make excuses on why we cannot transfer their domain name.If a customer changes their contact information on the domain, they cannot transfer the domain away from Doteasy until after 60 days. So basically, you are FORCED to renew with Doteasy. If you want to transfer your domain name before expiry, they will keep the ball rolling until it expires, and then tell you it has expired, so you cant transfer it and you are required to renew, which is a 60 day lock. If you attempt to dispute charges via your bank. They WILL charge you a hosting chargeback fee.Be warned and stay the hell away from Doteasy / In2Net / Dollarhost (they are all the same company).


The whole 100% wind enrgy is a scam.Unlimited disk space and bandwidth isn't posbsile so is a scam.You can't trust any host with your backups. While backups are great you must keep your own also.


As I understand it, this is a great modem to use if you have a very esienxpve, extremely high speed internet package. The reason for this is that it has bonded channels technology that enables you to get more bandwidth (at high speeds) than the Motorola Surfboard 5120 or 5101. So if you have the top of the line internet package, and a very fast computer, and if the cable internet in your area supports DOCSIS 3.0, this thing could work screaming fast for you. I do not have screaming fast internet, although my computer is pretty bleeding fast. I can't afford that kind of cost for a monthly subscription, because it is a constant and forever drain of a lot of money, and I don't earn that much money where I can do that. I am located in the Phoenix, Arizona area, and have the $40/month Preferred internet package. My downstream bandwidth varies a lot by the time of day, it ranges between 13Mbps all the way up to about 23Mbps when almost everyone else is in bed sleeping. My upstream bandwidth is capped real low, as with most consumer internet packages, so it hardly varies at all. It's almost always the same, at about 1Mbps. If you want an accurate test of your internet bandwidth, do not use the main bandwidth testing sites. Their tests are way too short in duration and give you an extremely exaggerated notion of your top speeds. Go to testmy dot net and use the largest size tests they will allow you to. Before purchasing this modem from an unnamed extremely large local retailer, I had read lots and lots of reviews saying that this modem dramatically improved the speed of relatively slow connections. I tested my bandwidth both before and after very thoroughly, both upstream and down. In the before part of my tests, I was using a Motorola Surfboard 5120. I saw absolutely no significant difference in either my upstream or downstream speeds after switching in the newer model. The reason this happened is because the 6120 is designed with the bonded channel DOCSIS 3.0 technology that provides you with more bandwidth *in very high speed applications only*. So, if you have a bleeding fast internet connection, and your internet service provider supports DOCSIS 3.0 in your area, then you could see quite a large improvement in your bandwidth from this modem, according to everything I have read and heard. However, if like me, you cannot afford that speed of connection, you would be much better off saving your money and either keeping your Motorola Surboard 5120 or 5101, or getting one of those instead, since they are less esienxpve.


If any network cant handle it's users traffic now how can it handle DOCSIS 3.0 level traffic?

Chris Buechler

Everyone with any network sense understands you can't let customers run wild on residential connections and provide good service at reasonable prices. The means of resolving the problem of excessive use vary. Personally, I'd be happier if Insight didn't "manage" my traffic whatsoever, but rather offered *reasonable* usage-based billing. Reasonable is key, given what some other ISPs are now implementing with usage caps providing a low amount of transfer and charging exorbitant amounts for excess usage.



Opening up the cable modems is not upgrading the network. For example:

The village well is running dry. To solve the problem, do you:

a. dig additional deeper wells
b. give the villagers bigger buckets?

You apparently picked "b" and got an undesirable result.

Picking "a" would involve node splitting, and may be expensive. In the end, you would either have fewer subscribers sharing the same-sized bandwidth pool or the same number of subscribers sharing a larger sized pool.

Choosing "b" is inexpensive, doesn't change the number of subscribers or the pool, but has the side effect of making user applications believe that the upload pipe is now bigger when, on the average, it has remained the same size.

I'm enjoying this exchange, I hope it can continue in good tone.

I do think we're on the verge of teaching something terrific here to the users, and that is learning that Cable Internet, as currently deployed, is inferior to Telco for P2P uploads. Cable is superior for bringing in the downloads, but was not built for uploading in mind.

If we can admit that, we can do a few things:
1. Change users' expectations. Instead of configuring their P2P applications to use 80% of their uplink speeds, they should use much less (say 20%).
2. Allow consumers to choose the service that is best suited for them. Heavy downloaders from web, ftp, and "public" P2P trackers should stick with cable. Heavy uploaders, including users of "private" P2P trackers should move to another service or augment their service (I, personally, have both Cable Internet and DSL here at the house).

Heavy uploads is not what Cable is currently about. Hopefully the industry can change that as it moves more to SDV and DOCSIS 3 in the coming years. (Cox Cable is even hinting about FTTH!)

Looking back 10 years, perhaps this was the thought that preceded ISPs providing hosted personal web pages. If people hosted their own web pages instead, it could overwhelm the asymmetric model Cable relied upon when designing its systems.

Fast-forward to today, ISPs can host technology known as "seedboxes" or "remote servers" (two different things but both solutions worth investigating) to help take the pressure off of DOCSIS upstream. By doing this, the upstream box handles the P2P "give-back" on the IP side and the data coming to the user only crosses DOCSIS in the downstream direction.

As for Deep Packet Inspection, I'm not anti-DPI, but it doesn't belong interfering with users' desired communications on the net. That's not your role as the ISP. It's not your data, and you have no right to change a byte of it. But rather than manage the inner workings of the very applications that users use, persuade them by presenting a more attractive alternative.

I appreciate your blog and the tone of it. Perhaps we can keep this conversation in the "light" instead of in the "heat." Two rather incendiary elements are Richard Bennett and George Ou, both of which have elected to promote bias over technical facts, and both have elected to attack me rather than debate me.

Robb Topolski


I hate to say it but... I believe it really falls back to lack of competition with cable.

If free market competition would play out then supply and demand would push technology and all this debate about upstream bandwidth limiting would be moot. "that's my outside take"

I do enjoy using 20.0 Insightbb btw :)

The comments to this entry are closed.