Fair Access Policy Notice

[News]

I don't know if this has been discussed before, but today when trying to access an URL, a Wildblue notice came up suggesting my recent usage might send me over. I checked my data usage, and nothing seem unusual...but previous several days I have been YouTubing a little more.

[Spice300]

That message has never popped up on my screen, and I hope it never does because it would be annoying.

[MAKAKA]

I would only accept such a message if there was was also one that said:

Your resent usage has been lower than usual, are you having any problems?

[News]

Originally Posted by Spice300

That message has never popped up on my screen,

Here, see if it will come up for you HERE

Like I stated, I have been doing some heavy surfing....so, they may be using a program that looks at your usage day by day, and when you exceed a daily threshold, bingo, up it comes, in your face.

[equivocal]

Did the warning show up when using the proxy or direct? Just giving some thought as to how WB could intercept a request, replace it with a warning, keep track of having seen the fap, and then somehow get back on track to original url. Kinda ironic that it appears on the undocumented "free" day this month when the usage numbers aren't changing.

[YellowHammer]

Originally Posted by MAKAKA

I would only accept such a message if there was was also one that said:

Your resent usage has been lower than usual, are you having any problems?

Dream on!

[News]

Originally Posted by equivocal

Did the warning show up when using the proxy

With the proxy...also, when it comes up, it "saves" your requested URL so that once you click on it, your URL will come up. The actual URL for this warning has additional characters after the jsp (...fap/warning-high-usage.jsp)....so, I assume this is what bookmarks the requested URL on their end.

[News]

Originally Posted by equivocal

Did the warning show up when using the proxy or direct?

Both ways...I switched off Proxy to test...this kepts coming up...now they have redesigned the notice using basically a text file format.

Here is my current usage...and it kepts coming up.

[Terabyte]

Originally Posted by News

Both ways...I switched off Proxy to test...this kepts coming up...now they have redesigned the notice using basically a text file format.

Here is my current usage...and it kepts coming up.

Oh wonderful (not). That's intrusive and maddening. You are so far below that it is ridiculous. You could watch several movies on Netflix and still not be close. I hate "in your face stuff like that". Totally sucks.

[Spice300]

I have service through a NRTC, my download usage has been around 6,700 MB since April 28, 2009, my upload usage is around 200 MB and I do not get a pop up, fortunately. Half the time I do not receive FAP warnings when my download usage is above the 80% threshold.

[equivocal]

Originally Posted by News

Both ways...I switched off Proxy to test...this kepts coming up...now they have redesigned the notice using basically a text file format.

Does it warn for content-types other than text/html? text/plain, for example.

What would be really cool (and possibly definitive) would be output from a tool like lwp-request that shows the actual response with headers and not following redirection.

I guess what caught me by surprise is there would be people whose main concern is WB didn't give notice or the rules by which WB detects a spike. To me, it's that everything about it suggests that they are breaking the protocol. Along the lines of those companies who "broke" DNS so that they could sell crap to people looked for something at an unregistered domain.

According to the official word at wildblueworld, testing is limited to a few unnamed locations.

[Terabyte]

Originally Posted by equivocal

Does it warn for content-types other than text/html? text/plain, for example.

What would be really cool (and possibly definitive) would be output from a tool like lwp-request that shows the actual response with headers and not following redirection.

I guess what caught me by surprise is there would be people whose main concern is WB didn't give notice or the rules by which WB detects a spike. To me, it's that everything about it suggests that they are breaking the protocol. Along the lines of those companies who "broke" DNS so that they could sell crap to people looked for something at an unregistered domain.

According to the official word at wildblueworld, testing is limited to a few unnamed locations.

I think this is what you are referring to.

http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2...-redirects.ars

Even though the one "expert" makes exceptions for "helpful" information, I think what WildBlue is doing is appalling.

I don't like it when ISPs "hijack" a page for anything. This warning page hasn't happened to me yet, but if it ever does I'll be more than a little angry. I hope their test fails miserably and they don't implement it more widely. If they do I hope some of us are willing and ready to raise a little heck over it.

[lhookins]

Originally Posted by Terabyte

You are so far below that it is ridiculous. You could watch several movies on Netflix and still not be close. I hate "in your face stuff like that". Totally sucks.

Heh! If that bothers you, my usage will drive you totally insane.

"Actual Usage Upload" value="54"
"Usage Threshold Upload" value="5000"
"Actual Usage Download" value="229"
"Usage Threshold Download" value="17000"

I have been monitoring my usage very closely, and I know what kinds of things cause it to go up... and I don't mean doing downloads. Those numbers represent normal browsing and forum usage, with a lot of time spent on a modding forum I'm active in these days. It includes downloads and uploads of small to medium files.

I avoid threads that are heavy in graphics and stop the browser before it downloads large pictures. The only time I have heavy graphics downloads are when I'm catching up on web comics or checking out someone's picture links.

I've started using dialup when I'm chatting in IRC. It seems that every time I did before on WildBlue, my usage would go up and keep going up after I logged off, often for days or weeks. I suspect one of the IRC chatters is hitting my modem pretty hard with port probes and possibly bouncing other stuff off my modem.

Obviously I'm not watching movies or downloading music.

Hook

[YellowHammer]

Originally Posted by Spice300

I have service through a NRTC, my download usage has been around 6,700 MB since April 28, 2009, my upload usage is around 200 MB and I do not get a pop up, fortunately. Half the time I do not receive FAP warnings when my download usage is above the 80% threshold.

I've only received a FAP warning once, about 3 years ago. My NRTC has not sent a warning since. It was useless anyways, because the NRTC was using snail mail for the notificiation. I received it about a week after I hit 80%

[Terabyte]

I received a couple of the emails over the years, but all but one back on the Value Pack. We have two users. Both adults, and both aware of the FAP. Over the years I've just stopped even trying to do anything that would run the bandwidth up. But sometimes I do use more, like downloading a linux ISO or if I help a neigbor (I trade computer maintenance for housesitting) and after cleaning the machine from all the garbage I have to download Windows updates (the machine doesn't go on my network until it is clean).

Generally I'm around 6000 down and 500 up (todays is 5/8/2009 05:00,5918,570) , but have been up to 10000. My biggest daily usage is downloading podcasts to iTunes.

Anyway, I dread the day I see one of these pages. I monitor my own usage, keep my network secure (wpa-aes with a random generated long key on the wireless and a 600 second renewal) and don't need nanny net here.