Plug (und cox) (fwd)

[Logan Kennelly]

On Monday 29 July 2002 05:09 pm, John Olson wrote:
> The more I hear about cox, the more I'm glad to suffer with my sporadic
> SprintBBD service (DSL not available).  For one thing, Cox blocks a
> plethora of ports including 25 and 110 (The list on their site
> somewhere, you really have to hunt for it).  
> FWIW, Mesa has two cable systems, Cox and cableAmerica.  I have a friend
> on CableAmerica's cable service and he's happy.  He's doing average user
> stuff, but has a static IP, a cheap router behind his modem serving a
> few Windows boxes, and does VPN to his employer with no problems.

I am also a Cox customer, and I think the connection is great for the price.  
I generally get connection speeds between 250 and 380 kBps downstream 
(which means the server generally limits the connection) and 38 kBps 
upstream (which is so consistent that I know a cap is in place).

The only complaint is that I lose service for a time period of 30 to 60 
minutes every night at around midnight (a time which happens to coincide 
with when the digital television program guide is updating).  I would be 
happier if they could remove that downtime or shift it to 5:00 AM, but it 
is too inexpensive to be picky. :-P

I don't know if this is still true, but my father uses cableAmerica at home 
and his experience has been good, but not _as_ good.  He does get a static 
IP, but that IP is in the private range (i.e. no public servers).  
Furthermore, although he does not appear to suffer from daily downtime, I 
don't think he has ever gotten a connection over 150 kBps.  I wouldn't take 
this as absolute truth, though, since I have no personal experience with 
it.

-- 
						Logan Kennelly
      ,,,
     (. .)
--ooO-(_)-Ooo--