[133071] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: "Unlimited" wireless data...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jason J. W. Williams)
Fri Dec 3 19:01:55 2010
From: "Jason J. W. Williams" <williamsjj@digitar.com>
To: Nathan Eisenberg <nathan@atlasnetworks.us>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2010 19:01:41 -0500
In-Reply-To: <8C26A4FDAE599041A13EB499117D3C286B271368@ex-mb-1.corp.atlasnetworks.us>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
I would second Nathan's experience. Tried to use them for our corporate off=
ice as a life boat when our T1 provider was sold to an outfit that didn't a=
nswer the support lines. Clear's NAT is atrocious and can't be turned off, =
so you can't drop a real firewall behind it on a single static.=20
-J
--------
Jason J. W. Williams, COO/CTO
DigiTar
williamsjj@digitar.com
V: 208.343.8520
F: 208.322.8522
M: 208.863.0727
www.digitar.com
On Dec 3, 2010, at 4:47 PM, Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
>=20
>> This came up in another thread yesterday or today, and I just got the
>> solicitation mailer for Clearwire's WiMAX service in Tampa Bay, which th=
ey
>> call "4G", though the ITU disagrees.
>>=20
>> The AUP is here: http://www.clear.com/legal/aup
>=20
> I cannot strongly enough discourage you from using their service. My exp=
erience with them has been consistently awful - and given that they're head=
quartered in my area, that's unacceptable. I'm informed that my experience=
is not at all unique - either to the Seattle area or to their service at l=
arge. Their Wikipedia article tells you pretty much everything you need to=
know.
>=20
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clearwire
>=20
> Their definition of unlimited tends to be "barely acceptable throughput l=
evels, until you start streaming youtube/netflix or doing a long-running do=
wnload or using bittorrent to seed files to your work PC and laptop or usin=
g your VPN to retrieve a document, in which case, we won't turn you off, we=
'll just silently jail you into a 32-128kbps bandwidth profile. Also, hav=
e some poorly implemented NAT on our ludicrously underpowered CPEs!"
>=20
> I also understand that they've been having financial difficulties, so the=
y're unlikely to address the issues their customers are faced with.
>=20
> If I were you, I would keep your backpack offline until another option is=
available. You're not going to be able to use VOIP on their service, anyw=
ays.
>=20
> Nathan
> (Speaking as an individual - not as the company I work for.)
>=20
> !SIG:4cf9826a241136755510774!
>=20
