4 ms·

I live in a small-ish market in the Northeast that has been under Time Warner's thumb (now Spectrum) for some time. Since moving here ~2012 there has been the p

I live in a small-ish market in the Northeast that has been under Time Warner's thumb (now Spectrum) for some time. Since moving here ~2012 there has been the promise of fiber to the home by a small local ISP. To everyone's surprise, and even TWC, expansion started really happening in 2016 and has exploded since for this same small ISP. They're relying on actual order fulfillment with payment once property easements are settled and engineering completes in what they designate as individual districts. With packages promising 100mbit/10mbit as base for $50/month and up to 1gbps/100mbps for $100 ($110 for static IP) TWC couldn't come close (30mbit/5mbit for $70+ at the time I was able to switch in spring 2016). This expansion prompted TWC to expand their packages after the Charter merger but they still cannot deliver what this now growing ISP can promise at similar cost. This is what Net Neutrality means to these large ISP's. Giving equal footing to consumers and small businesses they have been fleecing for so long though nowhere near actually being equal. It's clear people are fed up and can express that. Pai & his FCC removing any semblance of voice to that public is shameful and unethical and clearly, as has been stated over the previous months, not based in fact.

Simon_says 9y ago
Which city? I'm moving there.
- swozey 9y ago
  Chattanooga, TN has municipal broadband provided by the utilities company. They have 10gig connections for $300/mo. https://epb.com/home-store/internet#pricing https://epb.com/home-store/internet#pricing
shmageggy 9y ago
Hi neighbor. After the Charter merger Spectrum dropped my grandfathered $35 plan, so now I'm switching to <small local ISP> since I'm lucky enough to have enough interest in my neighborhood to have service from them. Glad to FINALLY have some competition around here.
- philamonster 9y ago
  Howdy! I hope you get to enjoy their service. Just some notes from having been a customer for almost 2 years: Be prepared for some growing pains. It took around a month or two for me to get close to link capacity for various reasons that were both issues with my hardware (needed a "real" router for 1gbps) and issues with the service. It took maybe 3 or 4 service tickets and multiple config changes on their end but I've not had issues since. In the nearly 2 years as a customer they have switched networks twice, three times if you include Level 3 sale to CenturyLink. Around the switch to L3 to accommodate new growth CGNAT was deployed. I have no idea about actual numbers but districts would be behind only a handful of public IPv4 addresses across a large area. IPv6 is ready to go but until user experience is improved (too much IPv4 only on the web) they will not enforce. The $10 I mentioned in previous post for static IP was for people that already had accounts when this change occurred. New accounts have to pay $25/month. When I first switched from TWC they provided 2 public IP's so this was a bit of a downer. I received notice this past week that emergency maintenance was to take place next weekend which always makes me hold my breath as more expansion occurs. They also I don't think service the northern, poorest part of the city. This could be due to lack of interest/knowledge that the service exists or part of the arrangement that TWC has contractually with the municipality (pure speculation). Also, there are certain areas that will not get service ever. It seems that buried utilities have the greatest impact on such decisions.
treis 9y ago
What does Net Neutrality have to do with your story?
- jjoonathan 9y ago
  It's strong evidence that net neutrality wasn't the dominant factor "crippling investment."
  - treis 9y ago
    Isn't it the opposite? A new ISP competing is presented as something noteworthy and unusual. That's exactly what we would expect to see in an environment of crippled investment.
    - philamonster 9y ago
      >A new ISP competing is presented as something noteworthy and unusual. But it is. I moved here from a large city and my _first_ thought after having FiOS for a couple years was damn, TWC; throttling, data caps & absenteeism. I heard nothing but complaints and horror stories from locals but the only alternative was (only) Frontier which was somehow worse. In the view you present, how is overturning NN not benefiting TWC while at the same time allowing for more investment and growth? Wouldn't that be detrimental to TWC's business? Not to mention this new ISP's expansion didn't really start until after NN was enforced, whether coincidentally or not.

Simon_says 9y ago

Which city? I'm moving there.

swozey 9y ago
Chattanooga, TN has municipal broadband provided by the utilities company. They have 10gig connections for $300/mo. https://epb.com/home-store/internet#pricing https://epb.com/home-store/internet#pricing

shmageggy 9y ago

Hi neighbor. After the Charter merger Spectrum dropped my grandfathered $35 plan, so now I'm switching to <small local ISP> since I'm lucky enough to have enough interest in my neighborhood to have service from them. Glad to FINALLY have some competition around here.

philamonster 9y ago
Howdy! I hope you get to enjoy their service. Just some notes from having been a customer for almost 2 years: Be prepared for some growing pains. It took around a month or two for me to get close to link capacity for various reasons that were both issues with my hardware (needed a "real" router for 1gbps) and issues with the service. It took maybe 3 or 4 service tickets and multiple config changes on their end but I've not had issues since. In the nearly 2 years as a customer they have switched networks twice, three times if you include Level 3 sale to CenturyLink. Around the switch to L3 to accommodate new growth CGNAT was deployed. I have no idea about actual numbers but districts would be behind only a handful of public IPv4 addresses across a large area. IPv6 is ready to go but until user experience is improved (too much IPv4 only on the web) they will not enforce. The $10 I mentioned in previous post for static IP was for people that already had accounts when this change occurred. New accounts have to pay $25/month. When I first switched from TWC they provided 2 public IP's so this was a bit of a downer. I received notice this past week that emergency maintenance was to take place next weekend which always makes me hold my breath as more expansion occurs. They also I don't think service the northern, poorest part of the city. This could be due to lack of interest/knowledge that the service exists or part of the arrangement that TWC has contractually with the municipality (pure speculation). Also, there are certain areas that will not get service ever. It seems that buried utilities have the greatest impact on such decisions.

treis 9y ago

What does Net Neutrality have to do with your story?

jjoonathan 9y ago
It's strong evidence that net neutrality wasn't the dominant factor "crippling investment."
- treis 9y ago
  Isn't it the opposite? A new ISP competing is presented as something noteworthy and unusual. That's exactly what we would expect to see in an environment of crippled investment.
  - philamonster 9y ago
    >A new ISP competing is presented as something noteworthy and unusual. But it is. I moved here from a large city and my _first_ thought after having FiOS for a couple years was damn, TWC; throttling, data caps & absenteeism. I heard nothing but complaints and horror stories from locals but the only alternative was (only) Frontier which was somehow worse. In the view you present, how is overturning NN not benefiting TWC while at the same time allowing for more investment and growth? Wouldn't that be detrimental to TWC's business? Not to mention this new ISP's expansion didn't really start until after NN was enforced, whether coincidentally or not.