[RndTbl] Shaw Port 25

Trevor Cordes trevor at tecnopolis.ca
Mon Jun 4 14:13:31 CDT 2007

On  3 Jun, Raymond J. Henry wrote:
> Last I checked, static IP addresses drove the price of Shaw's service up
> over MTS's (MTS supplies 2 statics with their business accounts)... Is
> anyone seeing a benefit of Shaw over MTS?

Are you kidding?  MTS sucks big time.  Shaw Extreme clobbers MTS on
download speed, and more importantly upload speed.  Upload is at least
4-8X faster with Shaw Extreme.  Latency is miniscule Extreme-to-Extreme
(20-40ms).  MTS can barely get under 100ms on a good day.  MTS is
unreliable, disconnects you regularly, and requires crappy PPPoE with
crappy authentication which always causes problems (not like Shaw's
plug-n-go) especially when MTS decides to unilaterally change your user
id suffix without telling you, which has happened to my customers at
least 3 times.  And the icing: they block *incoming* port 25, which has
zero anti-spam benefit.

I could go on, but you get the point.  And I'm speaking from direct
experience because at least 3 of my customers are still on MTS because
their buildings are not wired for Shaw.

More information about the Roundtable mailing list