Talk:HughesNet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Archive

  1. Talk:HughesNet/Archive1

[edit] USB? DirecWay?

I had DirecPC service in '96 and '97, and the satellite dish was labed DirectPC by Hughes, with no mention of DirectWay. Also, given that USB wasn't available on most computers at the time, connection to the service required a (pretty large) PCI card, not an external USB modem.

  • DirecWay was born from DirecPC when the ethernet interface was added to make clear this worked with systems other than PCs. The DirecWay brand became HughesNet afteer Hughes Network Systems left the DirecTV group. SimonMWatts 17:39, 27 September 2007 (UTC) A Hughes employee.

[edit] Sorry, didn't work!

I have HughesNet, and I described my problems here. Doing "ping -t myhughesnet.com" didn't work at all for me.

BTW, this is in response to the last message in the Archive linked above. * Even though this isn't the kind of discussion forum to resolve problems, the problems you described with "rotating" IP addresses got me thinking. Since I have a static IP for VPN reasons and don't recall using bittorrent when I had an dynamic IP before, I never saw this problem. I don't believe they use "rotating" addresses but my guess is that they are using a pool of IP addresses. They probably throw your "idle" IP address back into a least-recently-used NAT address pool to be used by the next person to do an implicit "soft" NAT logon when they send a packet. They did something like that for the original DirecPC: "The source address of the original IP datagram is then changed to that of the DirecPC satellite gateway so that information from the remote Internet host is returned to the gateway instead of to the user via his Internet service provider." [[29]]. So it looks like they could be using NAT with an address lifetime shorter than you would like (see section 4 in [[30]] where IPSEC tries to address a similar problem). You may be able to fix the "problem" with a continuous slow background ping (i.e. DOS command: ping -t myhughesnet.com). This will keep your IP address constantly "in use" even while you are doing local wiki page edits thus keeping your address alive. I don't believe they will let an active "in use" address expire since they probably want to avoid dropping packets "in-flight" that used the previous NAT address.

Phew! Ξon2see talk⁄contribsΞ

[edit] Non-POV issues concerning FAP

The section on the FAP must be reworded for non-POV reasons. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not an editorial. --KJRehberg 20:35, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


I agree. It's definitely not neutral and there are no sources cited. I don't understand why this is left on the page. I'm a new wiki editor, but I thought that content in violation of wiki policy was deleted. Allergy-mom 16:24, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

The article does have numerous inaccuracies, eg: fap goes to below 2kbps for four hours (not 24) before it goes to 7-12 kbps (for 20 hours), etc, they also ignore that low bandwith high packet rates are subject to random disconnections (as i've noticed with RTS games over the internet, if you play 'like a pro' your connection tends to mysteriously cut out like weather outages every few hours for a while even during clear skies, etc..) even though during a typical hour the game sends less than 500 kb of data, if you (the end user) exceeds 200 packets per minute (which is semi-pro apm, true pros go up to 1200 apm) the connection becomes shakey after a few games... and the 200 mb doesnt include packet overhead, only the data size for packets.

also, with modern downloading software one can dl at 10 kbps even after being fapped (during the last 20 hours) and the conenction will still unfap, if you use the full 12kbps the fap period extends, but modern downloading software only needs a few configurations tweaks to work around the fap issue. if you think this article section is bad you should read the wiki on wildblue... the whole wiki needs to be redone with citations etc. starband which is the oldest game in satelite internet seems to have the least restrictive fap/use metering, but they cost the most, and before 2006 they had the oldest/ least effective sat equipment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.130.21 (talk) 17:02, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

  • Also the use of mb is wrong - what is a milibit? SimonMWatts 17:41, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

whoops the customer care page was incorrectly displaying things, they were saying fap free time was metered and vice verse, incorrectly so i deleted my comment..

The service does go to the slow speed for 24 hours now, not the 4 hours as before. The FAP can be viewed at: http://www.nationwidesatellite.com/HughesNet/service/HughesNet_fair_access_policy.asp

The text of the page in the url above that states this is: "The Fair Access Policy is straightforward. Based on an analysis of customer usage data, Hughes has established a download threshold for each of the HughesNet service plans that is well above the typical usage rates. Subscribers who exceed that threshold will experience reduced download speeds for approximately 24 hours."

Not only is the FAP section un-biased, in my mind it understates the problem. My vote is to keep it in as it is not advertised that you could have an average of 100Mb/day effective high speed rate in a worst case on a 200Mb/day plan once the 'punishment' is included in the calculation. (Yes, I am a biased hughes net user who was burned when it went from a limit per day to a limit per day + punishment without notice other than service below the level that was sold prior to the 24h limit and based on the still advertised 200MB/day (without the link to the FAP working unless you are a user on the following page:) http://go.gethughesnet.com/HUGHES/Rooms/DisplayPages/LayoutInitial?Container=com.webridge.entity.Entity%5BOID%5BA88DE5C756665B4FA1951234C6C9B659%5D%5D —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.82.9.104 (talk) 03:54, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I think the article understated the speed reduction. My recent experience was less than 2Kbps immediately after the threshold was exceeded. There was no explicit warning. It was a very rainy day and we had no idea as to the cause of the speed reduction until we checked the modem (http://192.168.0.1) and found the system status lamp red. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.82.9.77 (talk) 03:48, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I also think this section is accurate (and possibly under-emphasizes the FAP issue). I believe most rational people understand the need and purpose of the FAP and would be perfectly willing to stay within the alloted threshold. That said, it is difficult to do when there is no convenient or reliable means to check usage. Hughesnet provides no tools or utilities to show your status in real-time and there is no warning you are approaching or have exceeded the limits. This is a capability I believe most people assume would be available (without having to buy 3rd party software that tries to estimate the usage).

As far as the statements about changing policies, unclear communication, ambiguous and poorly defined (or at least poorly published) FAP specifications, these are all accurate and are not embellishments or slanderous. 67.142.130.20 (talk) 18:36, 17 April 2008 (UTC)Jeff

[edit] Where can I find that it says uploads contribute to the download limit?

I looked on the website and only found references to download limits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.19.14.29 (talk) 22:19, 7 April 2008 (UTC)