[136914] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: quietly....
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Sun Feb 6 13:21:21 2011
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <uCKSinaK5tTNFATH@perry.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2011 10:15:49 -0800
To: Roland Perry <lists@internetpolicyagency.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Feb 6, 2011, at 9:45 AM, Roland Perry wrote:
> In article <85D304BA-6C4E-4B86-9717-2ADB542B8606@delong.com>, Owen =
DeLong <owen@delong.com> writes
>=20
>>> Part of the problem is knowing in advance what ISPs will and won't =
do. It's all very well saying one shouldn't patronise an ISP that blocks =
port 25, for example, but where is that documented before you buy?
>>>=20
>> If they don't document partial internet access blockage in the =
contract and the contract says they are providing internet access, then, =
they are in breach and you are free to depart without a termination fee =
and in most cases, demand a refund for service to date.
>=20
> You may be right about enforcing that in the USA (is it an FCC =
thing?), but it won't fly in most other places.
>=20
It has worked for me so far in several countries.
No, it's not an FCC thing, it's called "Truth in advertising" and/or =
Fraud.
If you advertise a product as internet access, then, providing limited =
or partial access
to the internet does not fulfill the terms of the contract unless you =
have the appropriate
disclaimers.
>> Admittedly, I'm not over-fussed about email on my phone and I don't =
use
>> a tether device at this point.
>=20
> The 3G I'm discussing is a dongle intended for general access.
>=20
As I said, I don't use a tether device (the dongle would qualify
as a tether device in my meaning).
>> I mostly expect 3G and 4G networks to be broken internet anyway. I =
was more speaking in terms of land-line providers.
>=20
> Apparently there are something like three times as many people with =
mobile phones in the world, as with Internet access. And a lot of =
network expansion is expected to be based on mobile connectivity as a =
result.
While this is true, for whatever unfortunate reasons, those users seem =
to expect and
accept a certain level of brokenness in their internet access.
When I looked into the mobile contracts I have (SPRINT 4G/EVDO service =
for my phone
and AT&T 3G service on my iPad), it was pretty clear that they promised =
to provide
whatever they felt like under whatever circumstances they chose and I =
was supposed
to pay whether it works or not.
Unfortunately, lacking viable alternatives, we live with that, but, at =
least in their case,
the contract specifies that I accept brokenness as built in to their =
service models.
Owen
