Now I REALLY hate my ISP

[the_randomizer]

TLR Rant ahead!!! Beware!

So, I've been stuck with sh***y internet for the past six months, so last month, the entire apartment complex's internet goes down and after they fixed it, they claimed it to have been caused by an alleged "rouge" router; as an IT/Computer Science major, I find that claim to be utterly ridiculous and lacking in real evidence. So, aside from the general unbearably slow connection (we're talking

 

[GamerzHell9137]

Change ur ISP maybe??
Well i hate my ISP too cause i can't connect normally with my 3DS...

 

[the_randomizer]

Change ur ISP maybe??
Well i hate my ISP too cause i can't connect normally with my 3DS...

I wish I could change the ISP, but. it can't be changed, it's used for the entire apartment complex, so the internet cost is split up and divided among the total rent (part of what we pay per month is the internet). We used to have Comcast, but the got rid of it because people kept downloading torrent files (movies, games, etc). It's bulls**t if you ask me.


Ping test results:

Speed test results:

This test is the absolute fastest it ever gets, and even then, actual downloads for even small files take exorbitant amounts of time.

Yeah, it sucks balls.

 

[Foxi4]

Retards gonna retard. On numerous occasions, so-called "IT Specialists" told me that my router is assigning IP's to other computers. "Yeah, of course." Said I, knowing all-too-well that my router is perfectly fine and isn't even able to do that via the WAN port, but I gave it to them for diagnostics. Three times so-far, each time with the same, negative result.

In the end, they added a fee for using a router. Listen to this - since routers share the internet connection between computers, it's kinda like having "more Internet", so you have to pay $4 to split the connection you have between the devices you own. But wait! There's more! The fee is actually for a static external IP! You see, "having a router means that we need to assign a static, external IP to your MAC in our system for security reasons and to make sure that your router doesn't cause issues with the rest of the network". Okay, what? My IP is *still* assigned by their faulty DHCP server which sometimes goes ape shit and assigns LAN IP's rather than WAN ones, disconnecting me from the Internet ever-so-often because it never appears to know when the lease time ends, how does that improve my situation in any way and why do I have to pay for it? Fair play, I wanted a static external IP anyways, so it doesn't bother me, but making it a requirement because you have a router is moronic - routers support DHCP, mmm-kay?

//Rant

So yeah, I feel ya. Don't worry, they're all dumb.

 

[the_randomizer]

Retards gonna retard. On numerous occasions, so-called "IT Specialists" told me that my router is assigning IP's to other computers. "Yeah, of course." Said I, knowing all-too-well that my router is perfectly fine and isn't even able to do that via the WAN port, but I gave it to them for diagnostics. Three times so-far, each time with the same, negative result.

In the end, they added a fee for using a router. Listen to this - since routers share the internet connection between computers, it's kinda like having "more Internet", so you have to pay $4 to split the connection you have between the devices you own. Moreover, "having a router means that we need to assign a static, external IP to your MAC in our system for security reasons and to make sure that your router doesn't cause issues with the rest of the network". Okay, what? My IP is *still* assigned by their faulty DHCP server which sometimes go ape shit and assigns LAN IP's rather than WAN ones, disconnecting me from the Internet ever-so-often because it never appears to know when the lease time ends, how does that improve my situation in any way and why do I have to pay for it. Fair play, I wanted a static external IP anyways, so it doesn't bother me, but making it a requirement because you have a router is moronic - routers support DHCP, mmm-kay?

//Rant

So yeah, I feel ya. Don't worry, they're all dumb.

Yeah, I see you feel my pain. Those so-called IT specialists can screw off for all I care, but one thing's for sure, I want to find a solution. Why they didn't allow the residents to give them their opinions is beyond me. Giving everyone the same thing (internet)...now where have I heard that before...? Bloody wankers.


Any suggestions? Like starting a petition?

 

[Foxi4]

A petition would be nice, really.

Alternatively, if all the residents are supposed to receive the same transfer rates (I'm guessing this is a small establishment), then why not mount a friggin' massive directional antenna connected to *1* router, and if necessary, splitters? It's the best of both world - the router is there, on the roof, in a box, minding its own business and not influencing the rest of the network, splits one fast connection among the tennants. Win-Win.

That's how it's done around here when cables fail and there is no fibre optic in the ground and it *works*, a good directional antenna can really give you great transfer rates.

 

[Nebz]

I'd ask first what exactly is going on. That first sentence can be taken in two different ways. Either they're changing things around and this is temporary or they're being asshats and permanently changing things to Wireless for all which sounds lulzy. If it's the second than...

From my own experience with my IT team, I'd say they pretty much said "#$%@ everyone in the complex. They won't understand or give a crap anyway...." and for people such as yourself that know your way with such things the first thing that comes to mind is "Cry me a #$@&!*% river!!! Hahaha!!!."

I'd say try to contact whoever the hell is in charge, complain as much as possible, and if that fails take it up with their heads and bitch even more. Petitioning definitely sounds like a good direction... the situation sounds like total bull. I personally don't know my way around the workings of an Internet Service but it's not hard to see there's pure laziness at it's finest.

 

[the_randomizer]

A petition would be nice, really.

Alternatively, if all the residents are supposed to receive the same transfer rates (I'm guessing this is a small establishment), then why not mount a friggin' massive directional antenna connected to *1* router, and if necessary, splitters? It's the best of both world - the router is there, on the roof, in a box, minding its own business and not influencing the rest of the network, splits one fast connection among the tennants. Win-Win.

That's how it's done around here when cables fail and there is no fibre optic in the ground and it *works*, a good directional antenna can really give you great transfer rates.

The funny thing is, they advertise this complex as having good internet, which we all know to be a big fat lie. Not only that, but if they don't make the internet better (like if they make it worse during this unfortunate transition), I will personally see to it that any potential customers are diverted from signing contracts here and instead go to competing places. The complex is a pretty good-sized place (three buildings with 44 apartments in total), but as of now, there are so many routers they often conflict with each other and cause major interference (plus they all use the same effing channel, BIG MISTAKE). People also brought personal routers, which they don't know how to set up either, I mean yeah, I kind of see where the management is coming from, but they're approaching the issue in the worst way possible. It's asinine, and there is nothing in my contract that forces me to agree with such changes to the internet.

I'd ask first what exactly is going on. That first sentence can be taken in two different ways. Either they're changing things around and this is temporary or they're being asshats and permantely changing things to Wireless for all which sounds lulzy. If it's the second than...

From my own experience with my IT team, I'd say they pretty much said "#$%@ everyone in the complex. They won't understand or give a crap anyway...." and for people such as yourself that know your way with such things the first thing that comes to mind is "Cry me a #$@&!*% river!!! Hahaha!!!."

I'd say try to contact whoever the hell is in charge, complain as much as possible, and if that fails take it up with their heads and bitch even more. Petitioning definitely sounds like a good direction... the situation sounds like total bull. I personally don't know my way around the workings of an Internet Service but it's not hard to see there's pure laziness at it's finest.

Oh! Just got ninja'd! No, this is a permanent and not a temporary change, that's why I'm trying to figure out what the hell is going on and these wanker douchebags are so determined to screw us over. The lady who sent us the email is in charge of the complex, but she has no say in the internet and how it's organized, that would be a local ISP by the name Veracity. They suck balls, big time, and I hope they sod off if a reasonable comprised can't be reached. Again we didn't get a say in the change, which I guess would make us, the residents, the peons. I don't blame the landlady at all, she's only doing what's she's told and isn't tech savvy.

In other words, they're getting rid of all wired connections in favor of the so-much-more-reliable wireless. Oh, we all know how wireless connections NEVER drop, right???

 

[Foxi4]

A petition would be nice, really.

Alternatively, if all the residents are supposed to receive the same transfer rates (I'm guessing this is a small establishment), then why not mount a friggin' massive directional antenna connected to *1* router, and if necessary, splitters? It's the best of both world - the router is there, on the roof, in a box, minding its own business and not influencing the rest of the network, splits one fast connection among the tennants. Win-Win.

That's how it's done around here when cables fail and there is no fibre optic in the ground and it *works*, a good directional antenna can really give you great transfer rates.

The funny thing is, they advertise this complex as having good internet, which we all know to be a big fat lie. Not only that, but if they don't make the internet better (like if they make it worse during this unfortunate transition), I will personally see to it that any potential customers are diverted from signing contracts here and instead go to competing places. The complex is a pretty good-sized place (three buildings with 44 apartments in total), but as of now, there are so many routers they often conflict with each other and cause major interference (plus they all use the same effing channel, BIG MISTAKE). People also brought personal routers, which they don't know how to set up either, I mean yeah, I kind of see where the management is coming from, but they're approaching the issue in the worst way possible. It's asinine, and there is nothing in my contract that forces me to agree with such changes to the internet.

Well, it's like I said - it's an Infrastructure-sized network, so treat it as an infrastructure. As long as you isolate routers as much as humanly possible to contain any potential errors within subnetworks, you're good to go. A router on-top of each building fixes the issue - as many slots as many there are tennants, and it shields the rest of the network from anyone who doesn't know how to connect a router, since LAN ports can't assign shit via the WAN port of the mother router.

Giving antennas to each and every user (I assume that's how they're trying to organize this...?) is completely retarded and a waste of money when you can have *1* antenna for everyone. How much bandwidth could one building possibly need? Unless you are paying for the infrastructure revisions, in which case, you are going to be f*cked in the b-hole with no lube - those things cost a pretty penny.

 

[the_randomizer]

A petition would be nice, really.

Alternatively, if all the residents are supposed to receive the same transfer rates (I'm guessing this is a small establishment), then why not mount a friggin' massive directional antenna connected to *1* router, and if necessary, splitters? It's the best of both world - the router is there, on the roof, in a box, minding its own business and not influencing the rest of the network, splits one fast connection among the tennants. Win-Win.

That's how it's done around here when cables fail and there is no fibre optic in the ground and it *works*, a good directional antenna can really give you great transfer rates.

The funny thing is, they advertise this complex as having good internet, which we all know to be a big fat lie. Not only that, but if they don't make the internet better (like if they make it worse during this unfortunate transition), I will personally see to it that any potential customers are diverted from signing contracts here and instead go to competing places. The complex is a pretty good-sized place (three buildings with 44 apartments in total), but as of now, there are so many routers they often conflict with each other and cause major interference (plus they all use the same effing channel, BIG MISTAKE). People also brought personal routers, which they don't know how to set up either, I mean yeah, I kind of see where the management is coming from, but they're approaching the issue in the worst way possible. It's asinine, and there is nothing in my contract that forces me to agree with such changes to the internet.

Well, it's like I said - it's an Infrastructure-sized network, so treat it as an infrastructure. As long as you isolate routers as much as humanly possible to contain any potential errors within subnetworks, you're good to go. A router on-top of each building fixes the issue - as many slots as many there are tennants, and it shields the rest of the network from anyone who doesn't know how to connect a router, since LAN ports can't assign shit via the WAN port of the mother router.

Giving antennas to each and every user (I assume that's how they're trying to organize this...?) is completely retarded and a waste of money when you can have *1* antenna for everyone. How much bandwidth could one building possibly need? Unless you are paying for the infrastructure revisions, in which case, you are going to be f*cked in the b-hole with no lube - those things cost a pretty penny.

They won't do that, they want to make it as complicated as possible, even if I were to explain that solution to them, it would be no more efficacious than speaking to a wall, but I know people in the complex who are quite knowledgeable and collaborate with them for feedback and solutions.

 

[Foxi4]

They won't do that, they want to make it as complicated as possible, even if I were to explain that solution to them, it would be no more efficacious than speaking to a wall, but I know people in the complex who are quite knowledgeable and collaborate with them for feedback and solutions.

Question - does your contract in any way specify that the connection you are paying for is of a given type, and is it a fixed time-frame contract (with a specified amount of years/months) or one without a time-frame?

I don't know how it works in your country, but around here, changing anything that is stated in the contract you signed within the time-frame of its validity by your provider is breaching your statutory rights - such changes require re-negotiation of the contract and a new signature.

Not only you don't have to agree with this, you can effectively stall it until your contract reaches the end of its duration. Otherwise...

...and you will win, because the ISP cannot reserve a right to change anything as far as their service is concerned, even if they reserve the right to do so in the contract. In fact, a contract that does reserve this right is null and void from a legal stand-point - you've been paying for an illegal service, in which case...

Problem, ISP?

 

[the_randomizer]

They won't do that, they want to make it as complicated as possible, even if I were to explain that solution to them, it would be no more efficacious than speaking to a wall, but I know people in the complex who are quite knowledgeable and collaborate with them for feedback and solutions.

Question - does your contract in any way specify that the connection you are paying for is of a given type, and is it a fixed time-frame contract (with a specified amount of years/months) or one without a time-frame?

I don't know how it works in your country, but around here, changing anything that is stated in the contract you signed within the time-frame of its validity by your provider is breaching your statutory rights - such changes require re-negotiation of the contract and a new signature.

Not only you don't have to agree with this, you can effectively stall it until your contract reaches the end of its duration. Otherwise...

...and you will win, because the ISP cannot reserve a right to change anything as far as their service is concerned, even if they reserve the right to do so in the contract. In fact, a contract that does reserve this right is null and void from a legal stand-point - you've been paying for an illegal service, in which case...

Problem, ISP?

Quote from a Facebook response (name withheld for obvious reasons) "It was proven that the problem with the internet before was a rogue router that was causing interference. Kristi thus says, "Don't use personal routers anymore" and about three people listen. So they are shutting down all the personal routers that have been recently banned. We don't have a say in this? The heck we didn't. She asked politely more than once for people to turn off their routers and few listened, so they are taking matters into their own hands. But shutting down the routers isn't the ONLY thing they are doing. You left out the essential part that said "We are reworking the system" meaning they are fixing the internet and can't afford all the interference from the personal routers after they do that. Tell the whole story if you post like that. They are promising they are making the internet better and there will be an internet specialist in that probably knows more than you do. So be happy about this and don't complain"

Yeah, I guess I can see his point, but if getting rid of the extra personal routers was the problem in the first place, why the hell do they think using their own apartment-issued ones will be any better?

As for your question about the contract, no, I haven't read it in detail, but I know I don't have to resign it due to these "improvements". I do know a couple of lawyers in my extended family, though. The apartment's previous router sucked balls, how will this so-called "reworking" be any better or faster?

 

[tueidj]

They're just taking the easy way out. It's ridiculous to force wireless if every apartment is already wired up and it won't solve the existing problem - it actually makes it easier for people to add any poorly configured equipment to the network. What should be done is something similar to what Foxi4 was complaining about - a static IP for every apartment linked to a single nominated MAC address provided by the resident to whoever's in charge of IT. Any unknown devices or devices using the wrong IP could easily be blocked and dealt with, the only issue is it takes a few hours setup time that they obviously don't feel like doing. They could even set up a "captive portal" website that redirects all web traffic for unknown devices to a page that would let the user register their new/unidentified equipment with the authority.

 

[Ethevion]

Speed test results:

This test is the absolute fastest it ever gets, and even then, actual downloads for even small files take exorbitant amounts of time.

Yeah, it sucks balls.

I thought the 5 Mbps at work was bad.

 

[the_randomizer]

Speed test results:

This test is the absolute fastest it ever gets, and even then, actual downloads for even small files take exorbitant amounts of time.

Yeah, it sucks balls.

I thought the 5 Mbps at work was bad.

I was at my parent's house yesterday for dinner, whenever I test the connection while I'm over there, I get anywhere from 20-25mbps, so yes, and those speeds are normal. Over here, I'm lucky to get 3mpbs on a good day, which isn't often at all. I bet anything once they "fix" the internet tomorrow, I'll be lucky to hit 0.25mbps. A bunch of bollocks this is. My university gets gigabit speeds, which I often wished I had, but it would be prohibitively expensive in this area.