TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
4 edits |  Bandwidth throttling poor way to deal with P2P
While Rogers has the right and duty to block illegal P2P activity on its system, throttling ports or protocols is not the way to go about it. It is using a shotgun when a sniper rifle is what is needed. They should be using monitoring tools to identify those breaking the TOS rules and then using their unchallenged rights to disconnect any user breaking the Terms of Service(TOS). That way they can use contract law to achieve their ends and won't have to get all wrapped up in copyright issues.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
My Web Page |
|
Derch
Premium
join:2004-10-16
Tulsa, OK | Sword and the ISP
This is a doubled edged sword, damned if you do or don't. I feel sorry for any ISP that comes to this decision. |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| I like this idea
They are not limiting the amount of bytes you can transfer, they are just increasing the amount of time it takes to transfer those bytes. P2P has always been a bandwidth hog and it's not fair to the non-P2P users who want to be able to use VoIP, look at porn, and do other things online to have the bandwidth choked off by people keep using P2P all the time.
--
Rove / Rumsfeld 2008! |
|
asdjf
join:2005-01-01 | Clueless tactics
They should take a step back and ask themselves if this is really what they want to do. Making your services less valuable is not a good way to do business.
--
144 145 145 172 040 156 165 164 163 |
|
gheezer
Compooters R Us
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Henrietta, NY
2 edits | There's a lot of misunderstanding possible
P2P Traffic shaping only affects those who blatantly trade large volumes 24/7/365.
Many P2P file traders are relatively young (college/high school) and inexperienced in regards to Network Infrastructure. They don't undertsand that Bit Torrent and E Donkey, by default, allow UNLIMITED download requests from their machine.
This unlimited download requests causes thousands and thousands of simultaneous TCP connections attempts to make it's way through the Providers backbone to the relatively small devices the user connects through. Chewing up memory and CPU of even a Big Honking Router like a Cisco 6500.
What traffic shaping does, is, if the user won't limit their incoming download requests themselves, then the traffic shaping will do it for them. Thus saving CPU and memory of their connecting router for the rest of the users that connect through it. Saving resources for all that Pr0n and gaming and VoIP and streaming audio that everyone else likes to do.
If done correctly, the ONLY ones who would notice, would be the HEAVIEST of file traders.
--
Join the NAVY, see the world....It's mostly water! |
|
microserf
@cgocable.net
 from:
Vvian Kalyss 
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Bandwith throttling poor way to deal with P2P
said by tkjunkmail :
While Rogers has the right and duty to block illegal P2P activity on its system... Bullshit.
They're trying to do an end run around the industry classification they've fought tooth and nail to attain. They're using network quality as a mantra for anything they disagree with. Check out C-60, section 31 for clarification of the legal protections they bought on their shopping trip to Ottawa (it isn't law just yet).
Common carrier = don't touch my shit, just transport it. |
|
kdwycha
join:2003-01-30
Riverview, FL | This is just.....
Excess Lameness. |
|
hurleyp
join:2000-06-20
Ottawa, ON
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| reply to gheezer
Re: There's a lot of misunderstanding possible
said by gheezer :P2P Traffic shaping only affects those who blatantly trade large volumes 24/7/365. I agree. Throttle the abusers and let the rest of us get our work done. However, I think it inevitable that the P2P crowd will find a way around this in a few months. 
--
"I reject your reality and substitute my own." |
|
boltz
join:2000-12-06
Guelph, ON
| reply to gheezer
said by gheezer :If done correctly, the ONLY ones who would notice, would be the HEAVIEST of file traders. The key here is if done correctly.
Rogers targets whole nodes not individuals. |
|
packetscan
Premium
join:2004-10-19
Bridgeport, CT
clubs:
·Optimum Online
1 edit | reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Bandwith throttling poor way to deal with P2P
Sorry but I don't agree with that. The ISP shouldn't be Blocking or Throttling anything their customer does.
However
Someone creates a software product that facilitates the Theft of digital media they should be held accountable!
ISP Certainly Should NOT be snooping on their customers.
They have a Right to monitor Traffic congestion. However going any further to see what th customer is actually doing is CRAZY talk.
--
Who do you want to pay off today? |
|
sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
H0H 0H0
·Rogers Hi-Speed
Host:
Rogers
Bell Canada
| reply to microserf
I think you'll find that Canada does NOT have "common carrier" status, but the courts have in general granted the general concept that they are just a carrier.
Rogers has the duty and right to deal with users who are reported to them as having broken their terms of service which include using it for illegal activity. Rogers does not, even under their terms of service have the right to be the police, judge, jury and executioner.
Now, remember too that downloading copyright music has not been found to be illegal under Canadian copyright law.
Caps didn't work because their measuring tool is basically flawed, routinely contributing consumption to people whose computers have been off, and not charging bandwidth to people who've gone way over the preset hard caps.
Softcaps didn't work because they took the "you're downloading too much" "How much can I download" "Less" stance and adding 3 strikes and you're out when they can't even define the strike zone!
The reason for throttling is simple ... Rogers Digital Phone ... which is not VoIP, but in fact a Packet Data system sharing the last mile through the HFE nodes. P2P and gaming clog up the nodes which has produced horrible outbound voice quality issues. Rogers has too much invested in Digital Phone to back away from it and Throttling is how they're trying to keep things passable for DPS subscribers. Not that I can understand why anyone would use a company notorious for its service like negative optioning and cable outages for phone service. Moreover, it doesn't save most Bell subscribers much money at all. For me, it would be under $1 per month. |
|
Necronomikro
join:2005-09-01 | reply to gheezer
Re: There's a lot of misunderstanding possible
Typical bandwidth shaping is going to impact speeds as well as requests, meaning that all bittorrent users will notice. Want that brand new linux distro? Sorry, have to either download it from the super slow ftp site or even slower through BT. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
1 edit | reply to sbrook
Re: Bandwith throttling poor way to deal with P2P
But every ISP has the right to enforce TOS. And almost every ISP(certainly every cable company) prohibits running servers. And P2P apps are almost always acting as servers in their default config. Therefore an ISP can disconnect P2P users at will. Of course they don't because they don't want to lose paying customers in large numbers. But if they disconnected a few thousand and advertised the fact, the rest would fall in line quickly.
That way they don't have to get involved in proving copyright issues and what users are downloading. The mere use of P2P is grounds for disconnection.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
My Web Page |
|
microserf
@cgocable.net
| reply to sbrook
said by sbrook :I think you'll find that Canada does NOT have "common carrier" status, but the courts have in general granted the general concept that they are just a carrier. Same thing. Read C-60 to see how the concept has been enshrined.
said by sbrook :Rogers has the duty and right to deal with users who are reported to them as having broken their terms of service which include using it for illegal activity. I absolutely agree. This has nothing to do with with the verbal diarrhea above and dovetails nicely with how Canadian courts have ruled on the issue. Again, C-60 codifies this concept: notice-and-notice.
said by sbrook :... Rogers Digital Phone ... Good call. Might very well be. |
|
microserf
@cgocable.net
| reply to TKJunkMail
said by tkjunkmail :
That way they don't have to get involved in proving copyright issues and what users are downloading. They're not involved now, nor will they be in the future (if their lobby groups and current legal position are maintained).
Do you really want to start splitting hairs on what constitutes a server?  |
|
maartena
Stacked.
Premium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to microserf
said by microserf :said by tkjunkmail :
While Rogers has the right and duty to block illegal P2P activity on its system... Bullshit. An ISP has the right to set the terms of the service as they see fit. Whether they have the "duty" is whole other discussion, I believe that if you give internet accesss, you should give full access and not just partial.
Nevertheless, an ISP has the right to do whatever they please with their service, and if you don't agree with their terms, they probably won't mind at all if you move to a different ISP.
--
George W. Bush on Clinton going into Kosovo, 1999: “I think it’s also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn.”
Right. We're still waiting for that Mr. Bush.... |
|
gheezer
Compooters R Us
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Henrietta, NY
| reply to Necronomikro
Re: There's a lot of misunderstanding possible
said by Necronomikro :Typical bandwidth shaping is going to impact speeds as well as requests, meaning that all bittorrent users will notice. Want that brand new linux distro? Sorry, have to either download it from the super slow ftp site or even slower through BT. not if you limit the maximum number of connections, but leave the bandwidth alone.
it's the number of protocol requests that kill your upstream router's resources, so...limit the connection requests, you can still share the same bandwidth, just with fewer outside hosts.
--
Join the NAVY, see the world....It's mostly water! |
|
r8drfan4ever
join:2003-01-13
York, PA | reply to Necronomikro
Right, because the majority of p2p traffic are from the fine law abiding folks who are downloading Linux distros. Please tell me another story. |
|
maartena
Stacked.
Premium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to gheezer
said by gheezer :P2P Traffic shaping only affects those who blatantly trade large volumes 24/7/365. Which is probably less then 1% of their customers. If you are like me, who downloads maybe 1 movie in a month (if even that), a few mp3's here and there, and maybe a new game every now and then using p2p you aren't a strain on their network.
If I transfer more then 10 Gb of data in a month its a lot.
They should just make it easier on us: Only that 1% downloads more then say... 50 Gb a month. Set a traffic limit of 50 Gb a month, and then charge $1 for every Gb over that.
This won't affect about 95% of the customers, if not more. Of course no one like the idea of being "limited" all over sudden. Because that doesn't sound good.
--
George W. Bush on Clinton going into Kosovo, 1999: “I think it’s also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn.”
Right. We're still waiting for that Mr. Bush.... |
|
Necronomikro
join:2005-09-01
| reply to gheezer
Typically, they are doing this being bandwidth misers. They could care less about you if you are 'Downloading items via Peer 2 Peer', you're just a customer using the bandwidth to the max. They're not going to stop at throttling connection requests, they're going to slow down your P2P traffic. |
|
