If I get two comcast internet subscriptions into my home, will I get
double performance?
Assuming I have two PCs and each download something from each cable
modem.

Will these two subscriptions actually share a common pipe some where up
stream?

"DerekC" wrote:

Yes, but the common pipe will have more bandwidth. than
your two measely pipes.

*TimDaniels*

DerekC wrote:
The whole concept of the Internet is based on "common pipes" somewhere
upstream.

If you have two cable modems, and are paying for two accounts, the effect is
the same as if you have a cable modem, and your neighbor has a cable modem.
In all likelyhood, your neighborhood node has room for more than one more
customer, and the local bottleneck is going to be what each modem is capped
at, not the capacity of the node.

However, you may or may not be able to get your cable company to provide
such service. The databases that are used by the software packages usually
used by cable companies are based on GIS data. In the GIS database, your
residence will be one location, and will be able to have one account. It is
possible to alter things to make your residence appear as two residences,
but it requires not just a one-time change, but a flag so that when the GIS
data is updated your one residence can still appear as two, even though the
raw data shows it as one.

An easier thing for many cable companies to do is to offer you a
business-class account. That means the GIS data doesn't need to be changed;
just the class of your account needs to be changed. Not all cable companies
offer business packages, and those that do may not offer it in all areas or
may not offer it to residential properties.

If your cable company markets services direct to businesses, your best bet
would likely be to contact that department. The multitude of agents set-up
to sell residential services may not be aware of all the options that may be
available to you, and even if they are, they aren't used to selling them
everyday. They're also probably being timed as to how long they spend with
each customer, so they have no incentive to spend extra time with you, while
the business account folks usually don't have time-based goals, and are
encouraged to spend the time it takes to sell the right services.

--
Warren H.

==========
Disclaimer: My views reflect those of myself, and not my
employer, my friends, nor (as she often tells me) my wife.
Any resemblance to the views of anybody living or dead is
coincidental. No animals were hurt in the writing of this
response -- unless you count my dog who desperately wants
to go outside now.

This fall, vacuum up your leaves instead of raking:
http://www.holzemville.com/mall/blac...r/blowers.html

DerekC wrote:

Would you actually have that much bandwidth need to warrant paying
an extra $40 or so a month ? Chances are sticking a router on a single
connection will get you all you would ever need except for the rarest
of occasions.

On 21 Nov 2005 11:46:53 -0800, DerekC wrote:
I'll vote no assuming you buy one cable modem and two ip addresses.

I will be impressed if you get the two modems. They will want to leave
the plug on the drop open for the neighbors.

You bet. There is only one cable running down the alley/street not to
mention everyone sharing your gateway.

Now you buy one cable modem with one ip address, one router, and hook
both boxes to the router you are in the same boat less the cost of the
extra ip address.

In either case (1 or 2 ip) you get to decide what the size of the pipe
is downloaded into the cable modem from comcast. I have the 4 mbsec
service.

Actually, it is for providing 60 tenants free internet access in an
apartment complex.
Each of these two cables (and one cable modem on each) and take care of
30 apartment units thru a linksys router. $50 x2 = $100 a month for two
cable subscriptions sure beats getting a T1 line (over $600 a month)
and most surfer will download more than upload. In fact, the bandwith
is proportional to the number of subscription, we would like to order
like five of them for $200 and it still beats a T1 line.

From: "DerekC" <derekc@beyondautomation.com>

| Actually, it is for providing 60 tenants free internet access in an
| apartment complex.
| Each of these two cables (and one cable modem on each) and take care of
| 30 apartment units thru a linksys router. $50 x2 = $100 a month for two
| cable subscriptions sure beats getting a T1 line (over $600 a month)
| and most surfer will download more than upload. In fact, the bandwith
| is proportional to the number of subscription, we would like to order
| like five of them for $200 and it still beats a T1 line.

I think you find that is a violation of the Comcast Terms of Use policy since you are
providing their service to others thaat are not mebers of your family.

http://www.comcast.net/terms/use.jsp

ix. "resell the Service or otherwise make available to anyone outside the Premises the
ability to use the Service (i.e. wi-fi, or other methods of networking), in whole or in
part, directly or indirectly, or on a bundled or unbundled basis. The Service is for
personal and non-commercial use only and you agree not to use the Service for operation as
an Internet service provider or for any business enterprise or purpose, or as an end-point
on a non-Comcast local area network or wide area network; "


--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm

I see. It was just a thought.

Bit Twister wrote:

They can always use a splitter on one connection.

DerekC wrote:

It doesn't take much to beat a T1, more properly called DS1. A DS1 runs at
a max of 1.544 Mb/s. ADSL and cable modems routinely exceed that for
downloads. For example, my cable modem runs at 5 Mb/s (800K up) and I have
often seen close to that in practice.

David H. Lipman wrote:

He'd need a business account, to do what he wants.

f/fgeorge wrote:

That would make sense and a router that can load level/manage on the
two (or more) interfaces.

From: "$Bill" <news@SPAMOLAtodbe.com>

| f/fgeorge wrote:
|
| That would make sense and a router that can load level/manage on the
| two (or more) interfaces.

The Edimax PermaLink PRI-682 http://www.edimax.com/html/english/products/PRI682.htm has two
WAN ports and performs load balancing.

--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm

f/fgeorge wrote:

Well, with that solution, there'll be routing issues and how would the
double price compare with a business service?

James Knott wrote:

I would think $75-80 would cover it and give you maybe 6-7 Mb - what does
business service offer for B/W and at what price ?

f/fgeorge wrote:
It would still be a violation of the terms of service for Comcast, and if
the DSL account is also a residential account, it probably would be a
violation of their term of service as well.

Nothing like screwing two companies with more lawyers than people in some
small cities, and then having to deal with tenants who demand that the
Internet service continue. It would be so much fun for him to be in the
middle of that. How could one resist such an opportunity?

--
Warren H.

==========
Disclaimer: My views reflect those of myself, and not my
employer, my friends, nor (as she often tells me) my wife.
Any resemblance to the views of anybody living or dead is
coincidental. No animals were hurt in the writing of this
response -- unless you count my dog who desperately wants
to go outside now.

This fall, vacuum up your leaves instead of raking:
http://www.holzemville.com/mall/blac...r/blowers.html

$Bill wrote:

I have no idea about business rates, but even ignoring that, there are still
the routing and load balancing to consider.

James Knott wrote:

David already supplied a solution.

f/fgeorge wrote:

No matter what you have, you cannot load balance over two completely
independent connections, without cooperation of the two ISPs. At best, you
can attempt to forward traffic to the two routes as a form of balancing,
but you won't get proper balancing. That is one a TCP connection starts on
one path, it has to stay on that path. You cannot, for example, split a
large transfer over the two paths.

$Bill wrote:

???

The only note I see from him, is the one about the ToS.