back
4 comments
What "broadband signal" is he talking about there, and how does over-subscribing it weaken that signal?
Probably written by someone who doesn't completely understand what the problem is , but someone, at some point, explained it to him but since he didn't fully understand it then, he's remembering it wrong and wrote a letter which was proofread by a secretary who didn't understand the issue or the solution either. :) (talk about a run on sentence ;))
He's talking about the WiFi at various hotels and other venues and trying to explain how having the backhaul oversubscribed is causing the throughput to be next to nonexistant.
Poor Wi-Fi signals strength is not related to the upstream network nodes being over-subscribed with traffic. It is caused by the particular venue not deploying a sufficient number of well-placed access points.

Based on the technical gaffes in the letter, I do not believe that it identifies the correct root cause of the supposed connectivity difficulties. Yet, the letter makes statements which are damaging to the reputation of the ISP.

Some people will believe it because of the weight of the mayoral signature at the bottom, which appears to be an inappropriate use of that office.