It’s helpful to reply to the right person if you want a response. This was 2010. More than 6 years ago. This was FTTN, not DSL per say but close to it. It was a marketing failure. And the installation fee was due to a business account. That’s unrelated to the customer satisfaction/over promising/under delivering issue. The speeds I was paying for versus the speeds I was getting was close to 10:1 on all testing media EXCEPT for their speed test they said people should use. The same speed test had my cable line stating it was 25% of the actual throughput. I provided over 100 different tests all taken within moments of the others to show that their rating and product was, indeed, a lie. I shipped the modem back in the box they sent me and I ended up getting my installation costs reimbursed. Twice. So they paid me to not be happy with their product. > On Aug 15, 2016, at 5:07 PM, steve ulrich <sulrich at botwerks.org> wrote: > > while i enjoy a good centurylink flogging as much as the next guy, i > have to say i've been quite pleased with the service. there was no > $250 charge for installation, so perhaps i just got them on a good > day. though to be fair, it did take a bit longer to get them to add > my split on the OLT since apparently they ran out of capacity on the > previous split. that took no shortage of phone calls. > > given that the interface is a gige phy you're not going to be able to > detect a line rate change, you'd have to actively probe for changes in > throughput. which is an amusing notion. > > although i'm more curious as to what the actual expectation was > relative to the speed tests was? with the encapsulation overhead on > the service you're not going to get a full gigabit of IP throughput > anyway.