Internet access the last straw.

[zbeast]

Back in April of this year I decided to move and being that ATT takes a while to install
internet service I decided to give comcast a try.

Lets just say my experience has been less than steller.
I think most of the complaints of traffic shaping by Comcast is in reality their home routers crashing.
I come home to find my downloads or uploads have ether stopped or running at a trickle.
The fix is to unplug the power wait 30 seconds and reconnect it.
If your luckily it will run fine for about 4 hours and then it will crash again.

So I thought I should upgrade to their business class service more speed maybe better equipment.
Nope, sorry same trouble, under load Comcasts router simply stop working...
So after 10 support call's, 6 home visits... I've had enough, I'm kicking this crap to the curb and giving
ATT U-verse a try, There sales person's were in my area... they are giving a killer deal.

I current have a standard ATT dsl line running now as a current replacement for the Comcast system,
which i'm keeping but i'll also install this line to see if it will give me the high speeds they clame...
10mb (ganteeded) up to 20mb (theatrical)

No, i'm not rich, I make my moeny by using the internet it's not just for file trading.
So I can't put up with having my internet service crapping out ever other day.

[Aaron.Walkhouse]

I had router problems too, but I solved them permanently by doing this:
Make your PC the router instead.

[Golgo1]

I read the original post at the link provided. They want to get 2 or 3 connections, but still network... Sure you could setup the ICS and all that... I'm wondering, is there any sort of multiplexing hardware that would work with something like that? I assume you need an ISP modem on each connection. Or would you need a dedicated server to essentially run loadbalancing and such?

Just an academic question for those who might know, I have no need for anything like this at all

[zbeast]

The thing is I'm not running out of bandwidth, the trouble is that the cable routers supplied by
comcast has a firmware bug so that under load they just crash.
ya sure, I could go a head and hack the their, turn off the "routing" feature and leave the cable
bridge feature on and then buy my own real business class router and configure my local network's.
But i'm paying them moeny for this crap to work. I should not have to be engineering my own network
hardware.

What the other person is trying to do is bridge multiple wan network to a single lan network.
Which is not want I want to do...

I have 3 wan networks and they all don't cross communicate with each other which is what I want.
1 gaming network. ATT
1 media network ATT
1 P2p network. (comcast)
The p2p network I'm moving to ATT u-verse.

[chainmail]

I've crashed both home routers and commercial wi-fi routers when using P2P. It seems a lot of those routers are just not designed with any consideration of P2P, with all the connections multisource-swarming apps like Bittorrent and eMule like to use. I've found that choking down the number of P2P connections has helped a great deal in preventing router crashes.

[Paladwyn]

Frankly, I woulnd't pay them to do it, cut them off their paycheck, tell them to get all their crap outta your house. Which is what you did.

You opted to go with another company, which is one option...and probably the better choice anyways, however, I still prefer to manage my own network. I would love to have multiple connections coming in to seperate a few of the tasks...but for now, I can't.

[Aaron.Walkhouse]

Forget the multiple networks aspect and try one of your PCs as a router.
It's much more reliable and the capacity is an order of magnitude greater.

[IneptVagrant]

I'm wondering, is there any sort of multiplexing hardware that would work with something like that?

Of course there is... But its cheaper to use a PC. For windows server see the Routing and Remote Access mmc.

[Curmudgeon]

While PC based routers are interesting and all,I really think a properly configured HW based router would kick its ass.
Companys throw this crap out all the time to make way for the new stuff,for example my company just recently sent to the dump about 400 PSAX Packetstar units.(I forget the model #).Yea I know they arnt routers...but still.

[zbeast]

Well it’s been 2 weeks since I’ve installed ATT for my tv and my internet access.
I have to say that well it’s not bad; there are something’s that you lose.

1) This is not fiber to the home. Which would be 100mb. Its fiber to the block box then Internet over copper. They limit you to 10mb for your Internet access.
2) Currently they don’t support phone service on the same line. You want phone service you have to get a separate pots line for it.
3) You only get 10mb down and 2mb up.
4) If you want to watch tv you have to get a digital tv controller for each tv.
5) They only support one pvr per home and up to 6 tv’s .
6) When you’re watching live tv it does not support slow motion like a tivo.
7) The router they give you to make all this work does it’s own QOS to limit your Internet speeds to the cap speed and also to keep the tv boxes running. They seem to need at lease 2mb per channel per receiver.
The PVR can record 4 channels at once but if it’s doing that. It can prevent you from using other tv receivers in the home. I know that seems stupid but what’s happening is that your running out of bandwidth for tv channel streaming.
9) HDTV, they only support 1080i… not 1080p.

My thoughts on it so far.

Not bad, not great but not bad.
Lack of voip phone service kind of is a bummer also lack of slow motion when watching live tv is kind of odd.

But I got the service for better Internet not to watch tv.
I have to say it does that real well, tho they only support dynamic ip’s.
So far it’s worked flawlessly, I didn’t have one tv box crap out but it did it while the service guy was there. No big deal.

Would I recommend this to others?
I would say at this time, wait. What I wanted it for was the high and stable Internet bandwidth not for tv watching. The Internet thing it does ok.

If I could get it I would say take a look at Version fios.
The clam they will be providing Speeds at 50 Mbps.

For me the TV thing I really don’t care about, I’m more than happy to buy, download what I want to see.

What I want is faster internet speeds.
I'm happy over all, I’m no longer having to unplug and replug my cable box every few days just to
Keep it working. Torrents \ emule traffic don’t crash the router anymore.

once a month.

[thejynxed]

Verizon has already been testing 100 Mbps connections in certain markets, so the 50 Mbps connection is definitely do-able, since they already offer 45/25 in most markets that have FiOS already.

[HEAT84]

I have AT&T and I have my modem in bridge mode to bypass the router because when I first got DSL (4 or 5 years a go), the router couldn't hande P2Ping. I still have same modem a Westell 2200 and its still in bridge mode. You don't need a router for 1.5 PC's anyway. I say 1.5 because my dad just does E-Mail and WWW with his and not nearly as often as I do. I'm kinda surprised they haven't issued me a new one. I'm kinda jealous of people with their modern modems that have advanced features such as dynamic DNS, but on the other hand I have no problems with it and U-Verse will be in my neighborhood by January (U-Verse for my birthday! ), so I might as well just use it til the end.

[btax]

im sorry you have to go through this zbeast, Comcast is evil and one day their scams will be exposed and everybody will hopefully boycott comcast to show the world and all ISPs, they can't attack their own customers.

You know what I heard, don't bite the hand that feeds you, a wise saying for comcast shouldn't bite their customers to End-Of-Service (EOS) death since businesses should be giving convince to their customers instead of fear, worry and grief.

[Psisquared]

I use my own router and cable modem.

[HEAT84]

In my previous post I said U-Verse by January of next year. I meant to say 2010. They finish 1 neighborhood every 6 months if they're lucky.