  Jodokast96Stupid people really piss me off.Premium
join:2005-11-23
Erial, NJ
kudos:2 | Delaying huh? So for the sake of speeding up the network they're slowing it down? Yeah, that sounds like the typical Comcast oxymoron. | |
|
 | | | Isn't this going to be fairly easy to circumvent? Isn't this going to be fairly easy to circumvent?
Using some sort of encrypted tunneling?
Multiple virtual circuits?
Rapid re-connect / switching to alternate virtual circuit? | |
|
| |  swhx7Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia | Re: Isn't this going to be fairly easy to circumvent? Customers shouldn't have to resort to such workarounds. Bittorrent is a legitimate protocol and people should be able to use it without interference.
The talk about bandwidth is an irrelevant pretext. An ISP can limit amount of traffic per user without discriminating against certain types of traffic.
If the only broadband option in an area is ISPs that systematically sabotage customers' connections, then we need laws to prohibit this abuse. | |
|
| | | | | Re: Isn't this going to be fairly easy to circumvent? You bring up a point with the competition. Every article I've read on this says it isn't being applied to ALL comcast connections, just some. The articles suggest that this may be due to the software/hardware still being rolled out.
Has anyone bothered to check to see if the lines Comcast isn't "delaying" packets happen to be in areas with multiple broadband options? Is this something they are trying out only on users who's only other choice is dial up?
--
Intel Quad Core QX6700 @3500Mhz/Asus P5N32-E SLI/4x 1024Mb Corsair/WD 74Gb Raptor/PNY 7800GTs SLI/Antec 550 True Control/Custom water cooler | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Isn't this going to be fairly easy to circumvent? said by Camelot One:Has anyone bothered to check to see if the lines Comcast isn't "delaying" packets happen to be in areas with multiple broadband options? Is this something they are trying out only on users who's only other choice is dial up? I'm in a FIOS area and I was one of the first lucky ones to get Sandvine, although I didn't know WTF was going on for months.I went and bought a new #@$%!!#@@ modem because of this . | |
|
| | | | | | | Re: Isn't this going to be fairly easy to circumvent? said by madrhino:said by Camelot One:Has anyone bothered to check to see if the lines Comcast isn't "delaying" packets happen to be in areas with multiple broadband options? Is this something they are trying out only on users who's only other choice is dial up? I'm in a FIOS area and I was one of the first lucky ones to get Sandvine, although I didn't know WTF was going on for months.I went and bought a new #@$%!!#@@ modem because of this . And I assume you are now a FIOS customer? 
--
Intel Quad Core QX6700 @3500Mhz/Asus P5N32-E SLI/4x 1024Mb Corsair/WD 74Gb Raptor/PNY 7800GTs SLI/Antec 550 True Control/Custom water cooler | |
|
| | | | | | | | Re: Isn't this going to be fairly easy to circumvent? said by Camelot One: And I assume you are now a FIOS customer? Yep.I haven't had the joy of returning the boxes to Comcast yet.I'm hoping the counter person asked why I canceled and writes it down.
--
Get Verizon FIOS,The Anti-DIOS | |
|
| | | | | | |  JTRockvilleData HoPremium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
 ·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Isn't this going to be fairly easy to circumvent? Don't count on it madrhino  . Upon turning in my equipment to Comcast when cancelling (at Comcast's Gude Drive office), all I was asked for was my name, customer number, and address. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Isn't this going to be fairly easy to circumvent? said by JTRockville:Don't count on it madrhino . Upon turning in my equipment to Comcast when cancelling (at Comcast's Gude Drive office), all I was asked for was my name, customer number, and address. The one on Largo Drive was rather unconcerned also. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | said by madrhino:said by Camelot One: And I assume you are now a FIOS customer? Yep.I haven't had the joy of returning the boxes to Comcast yet.I'm hoping the counter person asked why I canceled and writes it down. I think you should buy some "carpenter" jeans, and have a hammer hanging on the side loop when you take your equipment back.
--
Intel Quad Core QX6700 @3500Mhz/Asus P5N32-E SLI/4x 1024Mb Corsair/WD 74Gb Raptor/PNY 7800GTs SLI/Antec 550 True Control/Custom water cooler | |
|
| BarneyBadAssBadasses Fight For FreedomPremium
join:2004-05-07
00001 | Re: Delaying huh? and then they likely count the rejects as traffic load that you can't control.. so your counts go up and you don't get anything done.... luverly... simply loverly
--
---Barney | |
|
|  Morac
join:2001-08-30
Riverside, NJ
kudos:1 | It is being delayed, delayed indefinitely. That's obviously not the same as blocking.  | |
|
| Jodokast96Stupid people really piss me off.Premium
join:2005-11-23
Erial, NJ
kudos:2
2 edits | It won't matter as much now guys. Verizon officially rolled the 20/20 service so you can bet those heavy users that can get it, will.
"We don't impose caps upon our subscribers," insisted Susan Retta, Vice President of broadband solutions for Verizon. "We expect customers who order this 20/20 service will want to use it frequently, and we intend to give them the bandwidth that they ordered and they expect." Verizon just stuck it to 'em hard (where available). | |
|
Reviews:
 ·Stelera Wireless
| BINGO! Bull$hit bingo that is... I had to get out my hip waders for this one.
A poster on Slashdot put it rather succinctly when he posted: "I compare it to paying a gym membership, heading towards the treadmill only to be stopped by a trainer and told there is someone on it already. You look, see no one is on it, ask again and are allowed to use it. Sometimes the trainer comes over and tells you that you have to get off for someone else. Every time you get off, no one else gets on. So you have to restart your workout whenever the trainer asks."
He got modded +5 so shut your trap. | |
|
|  GlobalMindDomino Dude, POWER Systems GuyPremium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL | Re: BINGO! said by NightHawke:He got modded +5 so shut your trap. Good comparison, but since when do /. mod-ups really mean much of anything anyway.
K. | |
|
 intellerSociopaths always win.
join:2003-12-08
Tulsa, OK
1 edit | so two packets walk up to a club entrance.... both want to go through at the same time, but the packet wearing the Pirate Bay t-shirt isn't allowed in while the other packet is.
that packet has just been blocked. | |
|
| | | Re: so two packets walk up to a club entrance.... said by inteller:both want to go through at the same time, but the packet wearing the Pirate Bay t-shirt isn't allowed in while the other packet is. that packet has just been blocked. Sounds like good policy to me.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page | |
|
| | | | Re: so two packets walk up to a club entrance.... Is that why you keep changing your name? | |
|
| | | | I know, don't feed the trolls... but i can't help it
considering the internet is a marketplace, it sounds like it is anticompetitive measure that is blocking smaller outfits to distribute unless they go through the channels of distribution controlled by the incumbents. There is something very unAmerican about that. | |
|
| | | Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: so two packets walk up to a club entrance.... said by backness:I know, don't feed the trolls... but i can't help it ... not feeding, just responding. might be why the name changed - hard for the BS to take root when someone comes along and cleans it up.
comcast's problem is they don't care about their customers and treat 'em like mushrooms - you know the saying. | |
|
| |  81399672Premium
join:2006-05-17
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:2 | said by fAcEtIOUs:said by inteller:both want to go through at the same time, but the packet wearing the Pirate Bay t-shirt isn't allowed in while the other packet is. that packet has just been blocked. Sounds like good policy to me. is that offical or unoffical statement of comcast? | |
|
| | | | said by fAcEtIOUs:said by inteller:both want to go through at the same time, but the packet wearing the Pirate Bay t-shirt isn't allowed in while the other packet is. that packet has just been blocked. Sounds like good policy to me. two ways to look at it:
1. so called illegal file sharing sucking up bandwidth gets blocked, freeing up "legal" activities for customers.
2. the "legal" activities of today are tomorrow's "illegal" activities. for example, posting on messageboards. sorry, you've reached your keystroke limit for this billing cycle...you're blocked.
be careful as what you preach as moral today might be immoral tomorrow. | |
|
| | | | But that isn't what happens. No one knows which packets will be blocked. It could be the packet destined to a linux distro, or to download a new patch for a game. So in that sense they are being neutral as they will block/delay any P2P packets. | |
|
|  meskinctMad Scientist at WorkPremium
join:2002-01-07
Danbury, CT
 ·Comcast
| T-Shirt anyone? | |
|
| |  ThalerPremium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3 | Re: so two packets walk up to a club entrance.... Looks like a typo. That "Fast" should've gone between the "not" and "for". | |
|
| | JTRockvilleData HoPremium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD | Sooo.... if DSL is the turtle, is Comcast the rabbit?
In the end, doesn't the turtle win 'cuz he actually finished the race, whereas the rabbit got close then crapped out? | |
|
| | | | | Re: so two packets walk up to a club entrance.... Not exactly. The reason why the rabbit lost was that he got so far ahead he decided to sit under a tree and relax, thinking he had plenty of time to finish the race because the tortoise was so far behind.
Well the hare fell asleep under the tree and the tortoise kept plodding on in the race and won it.
I did find your analogy amusing though and very accurate.
--
True Happiness Must Come From Within | |
|
| swhx7Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia | said by inteller:both want to go through at the same time, but the packet wearing the Pirate Bay t-shirt isn't allowed in while the other packet is. that packet has just been blocked.
They don't look at which BT tracker the customer is using, only whether the packets are BT.
So it's more like, commuters are in line to get on the train, and Comcast is checking tickets at the gate, and they have an idea that people with brown skin ride the train too much, so they make them walk around the building a hundred times before they can get on, while the pale-skin commuters can go right through. | |
|
| |  james
join:2001-02-26
CWCville USA | Re: so two packets walk up to a club entrance.... Yeah, good idea, lets make this a race issue. | |
|
| | | ThalerPremium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3 Reviews:
 ·DSL EXTREME
| Re: so two packets walk up to a club entrance.... True, throwing around the race card is never a good thing, but it conveys the message correctly. The comcast slowdown is being targed not because of the content, but by the nature of the packet. They don't differentiate between a bootleg copy of Tranformers and a WoW customer downloading the latest game patch. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: so two packets walk up to a club entrance.... Why does Comcast continually drag it's name through the mud? It started with them sending letters that say you are using too much bandwidth and then refusing to tell you how much is too much. Then they deny doing what the whole world already knows they're doing. Now they further insult your intelligence by playing semantics (it's not blocking, it's delaying!). And you wonder why grandma is going medieval at the local Comcast office or why their customer service is so horrible. This company is clueless. | |
|
| |
| | axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: so two packets walk up to a club entrance.... They can't really do that without violating Network Neutrality completely. Discriminating protocols is a mild violation, discriminating servers is a huge violation.
I'd be ok with them only targeting tracking servers that have been proved to violate copyright or host underage pornography. It is a slippery slope, but I think a line can be drawn there and nobody would really complain. The reason they don't is that its cheaper for them to target the whole protocol. | |
|
| | | | WRONG! No traffic should be dropped, blocked, or interfered with in any way. Period. | |
|
 ztmikeMark for moderationPremium
join:2001-08-02
Michigan City, IN | PR LoL PR at its best here folks. lol | |
|
| | Are you KIDDING me? If you "delay" a packet beyond it's TTL, then it's the same as blocking it, not to mention totally rapes TCP, thus actually making traffic go SLOWER (remember, TCP is VERY easily congested).
Anyway, that's just blatantly wrong. | |
|
wtansillNcc1701
join:2000-10-10
Falls Church, VA | Potatoe/Potahtoe Either way a spud's a spud, and no matter how CC slices and dices their explanation, the net effect is the same. | |
|
|  dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | Re: Potatoe/Potahtoe said by wtansill:Either way a spud's a spud, and no matter how CC slices and dices their explanation, the net effect is the same. theres no e in potato!
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth | |
|
| | | | Re: Potatoe/Potahtoe said by dvd536:said by wtansill:Either way a spud's a spud, and no matter how CC slices and dices their explanation, the net effect is the same. theres no e in potato! Ease up, Bud. He's only following our illustrious Mr. Quayle's fine example of how to spel write... | |
|
 newviewEx .. Ex .. ExactlyPremium
join:2001-10-01
Parsonsburg, MD
kudos:1 | It's just another lie Why would we not consider Comcast's latest "explanation" as just another lie? Their first inclination in all matters of their discovered shenanigans is to lie.
And Comcast wonders why people hate them so much. | |
|
|  N3OGHYo Soy Col. "Bat" GuanoPremium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:1
1 edit | Re: It's just another lie B.B..B.but they're the BMW of the internet. The "premium" product.
Just don't try and take that shinny beemer through "Checkpoint Comcast" or the network Stasi will snag you and send your packet to the digital gulag.
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power… | |
|
gpp6
join:2001-12-15
Elmhurst, IL | too cowardly to enforce their AUP? File sharing is expressly prohibited through their AUP, but they're only delaying packets instead of blocking them? Sounds like they're too timid to enforce their AUP and the ensuing negative PR that would generate. | |
|
 RickPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT | I'm sorry but.... BBR's persistence in presenting this issue in a negative light is disturbing.
A company does not have to tell all about how they police their network from abuse. But yet, you somehow feel that "honesty" is the best policy in this case because "mom said so".
Well, I doubt that Mom encourages her little darlings to steal and trade copyrighted material.
And folks, raise your hands if you REALLY believe that that isn't what 99.9999% of bit torrent is really all about.
BBR says this.
"So is using hardware to send forged TCP packets with the RST (reset) flag set blocking or delaying? Does it matter? "
Of course it matters. There is a world of difference between blocking someone from doing something..and shaping and managing the way it impacts your company and customers.
I mean if that's not the case, why have lines at movie theaters? Everyone should just be able to jump over the counter and print out their own tickets and let it be a free for all.
The vast majority of people using these bit torrent services are not only breaking the law, but they're also the ones consuming the massive amounts of bandwidth that cause the rest of us problems. But it's important to remember that even given this..comcast is not cutting them off. Not blocking their access. They're managing it to keep the service viable and a good one for the rest of us.
Again, it's rather disturbing to see BBR continually present this issue as Comcast doing something wrong..in favor of the very small percentage of people who abuse this and other networks.
Network neutrality is not the issue here. The issue is flagrant abuse of isp's networks. And their right to control it.
Network neutrality does not have to say Comcast or any isp has to give someone 400 gigs a month of access for 42.95/month.
That is unreasonable..and damaging to the rest of us who want to use the service either modestly or, even heavily for that matter.
That kind of flow of data surpasses anything and everything reasonable. And it's coming from the bit torrent users.
If these people don't want these issues..they should divide up their services among ISP's..or buy their own T1 or more lines to the internet.
That is not what a residential service should be all about.
In closing, I'll say that I really think that BBR should get on the side of what's right here..and stop presenting comcast and others in the negative light you are.
You risk becoming much less as a website I think..something along the lines of a renegade website here to promote pirate bay or something.
I've always viewed BBR as being mainstream..but on the cutting edge of technology. Not out to rip companies for protecting and preserving the rights of we users.
Comcast is not wrong with what they're doing.
Not at all.
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic! | |
|
|
See 30 replies to this post |
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Just to clarify my position Everytime I try to download the latest linux distro release via bittorrent my connection drops. The modem will show as being online, but I won't be able to access the web.
I have Comcast.
--
Retaking our country one election at a time. | |
|
 NOCManMacChatterPremium
join:2004-09-30
Colorado Springs, CO | Devils Advocate I'm going to play devil's advocate here for a bit.
I do not mind they delaying mass downloads if that means when I want web pages to work they will not timeout because of a network congestion issue.
I know firsthand how bad bittorrent can be for an ISP who is trying to provide customers with a consistent service level. It throws all your bandwidth predictions out the window because every time you upgrade that 10% that causes the problem just sucks the upgrade right up with it.
There really needs to be some honest discussions between users and service providers as to what an acceptable method of dealing with bandwidth hogs.
One issue is the lack of a good point to multi-point distribution model that does not destroy network resources. It's now the upload that's the problem it's the download. Even if they were to put caching bittorrent servers on a cablecompany's head ends there's still the issue that the torrent application would suck down a good chunk of the bandwidth. On a dedicated medium such a DSL that would eliminate a huge bandwidth issue.
I think that's part of the reason the bad guys right now are the cable companies because their model for broadband delivery has the big flaw of not being able to provide dedicated bandwidth per customer in the same way a DSL/Fiber connection is capable of.
WISP/WiMax will also suffer this problem and even EVDO has an issue where the cell tower and the radio link are the choke points in the network.
--
Mac Chatter
»www.macchatter.net | |
|
|
See 13 replies to this post |
|
 CKizerAd eundum quo nemo ante iitPremium
join:2003-01-29
Tijeras, NM
kudos:2 | You spin me right round baby right round... Is any one else amused when PR idiots try to spin technology? | |
|
pfsmith
join:2006-11-16
Lafayette, IN
1 edit | This problem is easily solved, once it is fully understood.. The problem here is one of externalities. See:
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality
In a nutshell, the people that hog the pipe (BT users, in this particular case) aren't realizing the full economic costs of their usage. That is, there are unrealized externalities that are being born by the general public (not unlike air pollution from a factory, for example).
It would be VERY SIMPLE if the ISP would associate the costs of those externalities with THOSE CUSTOMERS THAT CREATE THEM. This would be the correct signal to send the typical BT user and LET THEM DECIDE IF THEY WANT TO PAY THE COST OF THEIR ECONOMIC CHOICES.
This could be achieved in many ways - different tiers of services, including *explicit* bandwidth limits - let the customer choose what is ENOUGH Internet for their needs. Or, even full 'pay for what you use' type billing (like the power company).
It really is that simple, and the ISPs should get a clue and put some thought into why their customers behave the way they do... it is MOSTLY because that is the economic signal they're being sent and therefor their behavior is really quite rational. Give the average customer the information they are lacking (ie. the *real* cost of their BT use) and LET THEM DECIDE. Then charge them accordingly, and provide the necessary network according to what the customer is paying for.
And, note also that this solution CORRECTLY ignores the thorny (and irrelavent) issues like copyright and legit/non-legit usage of a particular technology. These things should NOT be decided by the ISP... they really DON'T want to take responsibility for what kind of traffic is on their network since they are more likely than not to get it wrong.
| |
|
| | | Re: This problem is easily solved, once it is fully understood.. AH NO....
incase you didn't get it first time...NO!
let me repeat just to be sure....NOOOO!
The ISPs should face the fact that they need to have networks that can reasonably support whatever intended use the customer has for them. They need to expect that some percentage, be it large or small of the customers are going to desire to use the connection they have been given at its maximum capacity pretty much all the time. | |
|
m60521
join:2001-12-28
Hinsdale, IL Reviews:
·Comcast
| Isn't this identity theft? "So is using hardware to send forged TCP packets with the RST (reset) flag set blocking or delaying?"
If they send a packet purporting to be from me, that is not being sent by me, they have assumed my identity for that transaction. Are there not laws against such behavior? | |
|
| | | Re: Isn't this identity theft? I retract my previous post and appologise for my incorrect statements. I love the telecomm companies and demand they raise my rates and lock me into a 10 year contract. | |
|
 jbobReach Out and Touch SomeonePremium
join:2004-04-26
Little Rock, AR | Fox news report just out Well according to this post on the Comcast forum:
»[NEWS] COMCAST "BLOCKS" NET TRAFFIC
Comcast is admitting to "Blocking" file sharing | |
|
| | My thoughts As soon as there is another broadband option...Bye Bye Comcast, Bye Bye. | |
|
| | Article on SlashDot There is an article on Slashdot.org with one of the EFF's lawyers saying there have been a number of lawyers contacting their offices about the traffic shaping possibly with the intention of opening class action lawsuits.
It'll be poetic justice when this unadvertised "feature" of their service is brought before the court as false advertising. Class action lawsuits are VERY expensive for companies and tend to get unfair and stupid policies aborted. So stay tuned, I bet a dozen class action lawsuits open up in a less then a month and shortly thereafter Comcast changes the policy, at a minimum they stop advertising policies that contradict with the traffic shaping. | |
|
| |  funny
you self serving assholes are changing the rules to satisfy every whim..
--
»www.thereligionofpeace.com/ | |
|
| | | Re: funny And we keep giving them our money... | |
|
JigglywareGelatin based computing
join:2006-01-09
Kenosha, WI | "No soup for you!" Comcast has a bandwidth problem, which they are trying to solve without cluing in anybody to exactly how bad a problem they have. Comcast's bandwidth distribution could be compared to a restaurant that sells soup. They offer "Big bowl of soup: $3.99!" and people come in and buy a bowl. Except most people don't eat the whole bowl. Well, the restaurant takes these leftovers and dumps them back into the big pot o' soup in the back, saving them from having to make more soup. Then some really hungry people happen along, and start eating their whole bowl, which leaves no leftovers. The restaurant starts running out of soup. "Oh no!", cries the manager, "We are out of soup! What shall we do to fix this?" "Aha! I have it! Instead of making more soup, which would cost us money, let's put holes in the spoons of the heavy eaters, therefore keeping them from eating the whole bowl we gave them." And so the restaurant put holes in the spoons of the heavy eaters, those who would dare to consume the whole bowl they were offered, thus saving them from having to make an extra batch of soup. So the restaurant saved money, and could still advertise "Whole bowl of soup: $3.99!", but they didn't actually have to make enough soup to fill everybody's bowls, just enough to cover what the picky eaters ate. And they told the heavy eaters, "If you actually wanted to eat the whole bowl of soup advertised, maybe you should go to another restaurant tubby." Instead of actually cutting portions, or making enough soup for the demand.
Close enough analogy? | |
|
| | It makes me wonder! I was a very early cable internet customer of...
had to think about that for a minute...
Continental Cablevision, which became MediaOne, which was bought by AT&T, of which divison was bought by Comcast.
Yeah I think that was the right order of things. I got out just after the AT&T purchase but my comments apply right up through and including that...
Anyway, back when I first signed up I had to sign a contract with them for the cable internet which came back to bite THEM serveral times. In the contract it specified the service level, upload and download speeds, and a few other details.
The long and short of it was that several times I was not getting what was specified in the contract. I called them and they were legally by terms of the contract required to do what ever it took to make the connection do what was specified. The contract very specifically did not have the now famous and commonplace "up to" language. While I was gone by the time Comcast came along I was able to enforce the contract as a CableVision customer, a Mediaone customer, and an AT$&T customer..since it also didn't include the "we reserve the right to change the contact any damn old way wwe please, any dam old time we want language"...
It makes me wonder if I could still force Comcast to live up to the contract if I hadn't moved. | |
|
|
|
