We're a small, non-profit community-run organisation which links our remote, non-broadbanded rural community by wireless to a larger conurbation where dsl is available.
We've been using an Xnet flood plan for over a year perfectly satisfactorily - downhill with the wind behind me on a good day I can achieve download speeds of 5MBps - but our little network has grown to the point where we are having to consider a second dsl link at our gateway, particularly as the use of VoIP to supplement or even replace our chronically bad, incredibly expensive Telecom landline service is growing fast.
We have a second line available and I enquired of Xnet tech. if it would be possible for us to take out a second dsl account with it, and for the two connections to be bonded giving us one connection with around 13MBps down and >1MBps up, and it is the upload bandwidth that is now limiting the number of VoIP accounts we dare create.
No, Xnet couldn't.
I gather from elsewhere that interface bonding is something ISP can do if they choose, and must therefore assume Xnet choose not to do it for their customers.
I can understand why. After all, there's nothing in it for them.
Except that we now might as well have the second dsl plan with another provider to give us fail-over if there are problems with Xnet's network, and it will probably be Slingshot as it's VoIP plans are superior to Xnet's. And as Slingshot doesn't set VoIP traffic against its data cap I suspect most of our subscribers will have Slingshot VoIP accounts running over the Slingshot account. Maybe to the point we'll have to switch from Xnet to Slingshot on our existing plan to cope.
So I can well understand Xnet not bothering to cater for their customer's needs when there's nothing in it for them.
Except a satisfied customer, another account and maybe not losing the account they already have.
Mod Emeritus
Trusted
Microsoft NZ
