republican-creole
Search:  

 
 
   All ForumsHot TopicsGallery






how-to block ads


 
Forums » Cox Also Disrupting P2P Traffic
view: topics flat text 
Post a:

Comments on news posted 2007-11-15 15:35:37: Cox users in our forums have been complaining about peer to peer performance being less than optimal. ..

jester121
Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
·surpasshosting
·ViaTalk

Technically...

quote:
"This is conclusive proof that Cox is interfering with eDonkey uploads by abusing the RST (abort/reset) flag," he says.
It's evidence that someone/something between the user in the US and the one in Tel Aviv is interfering with traffic.

If you're going to talk like a scientist, then talk like a scientist.

funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype


1 edit

Re: Technically...

said by jester121 See Profile :

It's evidence that someone/something between the user in the US and the one in Tel Aviv is interfering with traffic.
No, because there are numerous other transactions also shown where the same thing happens - from all over the 'net. (See capture details HERE)

Tel Aviv was just the main example that I used in my post to to show the details of what was happening at the protocol level.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon USA
Are you affected by Comcast's RST forging? How to test it! -or- Read my original report.
amungus
Premium
join:2004-11-26
America
clubs:

eTree?

Hope this doesn't mess up perfectly legal torrents like eTree or archive.org.

Guess we wait and see...

People seem to forget one of the original intents of BT - "tapers" trading LEGAL recordings of concerts...
Believe it or not, it's a fairly large community that's still pretty active.

Would really stink if this were disrupted.
dagman52

join:2007-11-12
32879

Re: eTree?

I don't think it has anything to do with legal vs. illegal, its a method to manage traffic. Whether its a good one is a different story.
russotto

join:2000-10-05
Collegeville, PA
The RIAA had a law passed making taping of concerts illegal.

MarkyD
Premium
join:2002-08-20
Oklahoma City, OK
clubs:
·Cox HSI

Re: eTree?

said by russotto See Profile :

The RIAA had a law passed making taping of concerts illegal.
I'm not sure that's entirely true. Several bands that are signed to major labels encourage tapers.
amungus
Premium
join:2004-11-26
America
clubs:

Here's a list I found after a quick search
»btat.wagnerone.com/search.php?oneClick=1

If you can't find at least one artist/band that rings a bell, you should get out more (\sarcasm...)

Seriously, it's usually ok by most bands as long as you're not a total jerk. Also depends on venues too, but whatever.

Sarah
Premium,ExMod 2002-05
join:2001-01-09
Cambridge, MA
clubs:

said by amungus See Profile :

Hope this doesn't mess up perfectly legal torrents like eTree or archive.org.
If they are blocking BT, it will affect everything, legal or not. I was seeing some funny activity with torrents constantly resetting and not being able to seed/upload on my Comcast connection... and I was seeding perfectly legal torrents. Problem disappeared though, I think they were just testing it in my neighborhood or something. I live near MIT so they probably had all the tech-heads filling up their inbox with complaints.

My friend spent about 9 million hours tracking band members down and getting permission and signing waivers to videotape and getting permission for me to upload it, and then Comcast decides it's not allowed.
--
Killers and liars welcome
openbox9

join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast

Re: eTree?

said by Sarah See Profile :

My friend spent about 9 million hours tracking band members down and getting permission and signing waivers to videotape and getting permission for me to upload it, and then Comcast decides it's not allowed.
This is about Cox, not Comcast. And your friend is over a thousand years old?

Sarah
Premium,ExMod 2002-05
join:2001-01-09
Cambridge, MA
clubs:

Re: eTree?

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole
openbox9

join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA

Re: eTree?

Which part, actually getting permission, or the time spent to do so...or both.

Sarah
Premium,ExMod 2002-05
join:2001-01-09
Cambridge, MA
clubs:

Re: eTree?

said by openbox9 See Profile :

Which part, actually getting permission, or the time spent to do so...or both.
9 million hours = hyperbole. I do not know exactly how many hours he spent getting permission from all parties, but I do know it was a process that took him a couple of months from initial inquiry to actually getting permission to actually filling out all the forms the venue required. And yes, I watched him fill out the forms and I read the waiver he signed, so I know it is 100% on the up and up. He owns a record store and is always careful to get permission for everything so he doesn't piss off any of the labels or bands he works with.

The band was really pleased and thanked him for taking the time to tape and share with the fans, and they posted links to the videos on their site.

Lots of bands like it when their fans tape stuff. They see it as a compliment, and free advertising if it's shared on youtube or bittorrent.

said by TKJunkMail See Profile :

He can upload to a sever not using P2P apps like bittorent.
Bittorrent was invented for things like this, it is not illegal and there is no reason that we shouldn't be able to use it to share legal, homemade amateur videos. Don't all these broadband companies advertise how you can share video and music and pictures?
--
Killers and liars welcome
openbox9

join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast

Re: eTree?

said by Sarah See Profile :

He owns a record store and is always careful to get permission for everything so he doesn't piss off any of the labels or bands he works with.
If he's doing this for his record store, he probably shouldn't be using his Comcast residential connection. If he wishes to continue his distribution, there are numerous mechanisms to do so.
said by Sarah See Profile :

Bittorrent was invented for things like this, it is not illegal and there is no reason that we shouldn't be able to use it to share legal, homemade amateur videos.
I doubt the ISPs are doing this for legality reasons. They are most likely doing to decrease the burden on their networks.
said by Sarah See Profile :

Don't all these broadband companies advertise how you can share video and music and pictures?
I don't know about advertisements for all ISPs, but you can still share video, music, and pictures as advertised.

Sarah
Premium,ExMod 2002-05
join:2001-01-09
Cambridge, MA
clubs:

Re: eTree?

said by openbox9 See Profile :

If he's doing this for his record store
He's not.
he probably shouldn't be using his Comcast residential connection
He isn't.

I'm not sure how "he owns a record store" and "I have a Comcast connection" turned into "he is recording things for his store and using a Comcast connection"...
--
Killers and liars welcome
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20

Re: eTree?

So why don't you take this up in a thread that is about Comcast and let Cox has a moment in the sun!?

Why not call this website "Rag On Comcast".com?
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..."

Lumberjack
Premium
join:2003-01-18
Newport News, VA
This one time, on the Internet, I had a friend that did something too.
--
»www.fairtax.org

Sarah
Premium,ExMod 2002-05
join:2001-01-09
Cambridge, MA
clubs:

Re: eTree?

said by Lumberjack See Profile :

This one time, on the Internet, I had a friend that did something too.
If you're calling me a liar, why aren't you brave enough to say it?
--
Killers and liars welcome
jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA
You just can't share as much video, music, and pictures as you want, riiiight?
openbox9

join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA

Re: eTree?

Sure you can IAW your ISP's ToS and AUP.
wierdo

join:2001-02-16
Tulsa, OK
·Future Nine Corpor..
·Teliax VOIP

Re: eTree?

As I mentioned in response to some other fool upthread, Cox is interfering with BT seeds on CBS connections, which specifically allow servers. They're not just enforcing TOS.

Given that their "blocking" only kicks in on seeds, I think it's fair to say that what Cox is doing is enforcing their TOS regarding "no servers."

funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype

Re: eTree?

said by wierdo See Profile :

Given that their "blocking" only kicks in on seeds, I think it's fair to say that what Cox is doing is enforcing their TOS regarding "no servers."
That would be fair to say, however such a restriction in a "TOS" goes against the FCC policy statement.

quote:
FCC Chairman Michael Powell in 2004 announced a new set of non-discrimination principles, which he called the principles of "Network Freedom." In a speech at the Silicon Flatirons Symposium in February 2004, Powell stated that consumers must have the following four freedoms:

1. Freedom to access content.
2. Freedom to run applications.
3. Freedom to attach devices.
4. Freedom to obtain service plan information.[19]

As remarked upon by David Isenberg, Chairman Kevin Martin later modified these four freedoms to read:

1. Consumers are entitled to access the lawful Internet content of their choice;
2. Consumers are entitled to run applications and services of their choice, subject to the needs of law enforcement;
3. Consumers are entitled to connect their choice of legal devices that do not harm the network; and
4. Consumers are entitled to competition among network providers, application and service providers, and content providers.

On August 5, 2005, the FCC adopted a policy statement stating its adherence to these principles.

Federal Communications Commission (2005-08-05). New Principles Preserve and Promote the Open and Interconnected Nature of Public Internet (PDF).
So what trumps what? The TOS or the FCC policy?
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon USA
Are you affected by Comcast's RST forging? How to test it! -or- Read my original report.
wierdo

join:2001-02-16
Tulsa, OK
·Future Nine Corpor..
·Teliax VOIP

Re: eTree?

A mere statement of policy of that sort creates no obligation for any ISP to do anything, much less allow servers. Call me when the FCC has an actual rulemaking on the subject. Additionally, these moronic blocking schemes could arguably fall under "reasonable network management," at least insofar as they are used to enforce the ISP's terms of service or prevent BT users from sucking up the vast majority of the limited upstream bandwidth available on most cable systems.

I think it's crappy of them to not allow servers, but that's the way things have been for at least the last 10 years. It's something that we all contractually agreed to when signing up, and something we can all (theoretically; see my above posts) get around by paying them a bit more money each month to subscribe to the service which allows servers.

If anything, Cox is being more permissive than their TOS requires, although that's probably more because applications like WOW use BT to distribute patches than their being nice. Anything that requires the user to serve content is a technical TOS violation.

Of course, in reality, the cable companies should be quite happy for anything that makes them less of a net traffic sink. It's much easier to get peering when you're not sucking vastly more than you spew.
BrokenZOdiac

join:2005-01-11
Lost

said by funchords See Profile :

said by wierdo See Profile :

Given that their "blocking" only kicks in on seeds, I think it's fair to say that what Cox is doing is enforcing their TOS regarding "no servers."
That would be fair to say, however such a restriction in a "TOS" goes against the FCC policy statement.

quote:
FCC Chairman Michael Powell in 2004 announced a new set of non-discrimination principles, which he called the principles of "Network Freedom." In a speech at the Silicon Flatirons Symposium in February 2004, Powell stated that consumers must have the following four freedoms:

1. Freedom to access content.
2. Freedom to run applications.
3. Freedom to attach devices.
4. Freedom to obtain service plan information.[19]

As remarked upon by David Isenberg, Chairman Kevin Martin later modified these four freedoms to read:

1. Consumers are entitled to access the lawful Internet content of their choice;
2. Consumers are entitled to run applications and services of their choice, subject to the needs of law enforcement;
3. Consumers are entitled to connect their choice of legal devices that do not harm the network; and
4. Consumers are entitled to competition among network providers, application and service providers, and content providers.

On August 5, 2005, the FCC adopted a policy statement stating its adherence to these principles.

Federal Communications Commission (2005-08-05). New Principles Preserve and Promote the Open and Interconnected Nature of Public Internet (PDF).
So what trumps what? The TOS or the FCC policy?
Policy is not law
TOS is not law

Both are left to interpretation and when an ISP says no servers they mean no servers. You have the option to go elsewhere if you can not abide by reasonable network management. Just because one person decides 40,000 requests for the latest backstreet boys cd rip flooding into his neighborhood isnt affecting his connection too bad his neighbors might not feel the same way and have reason to complain because local network is being assaulted in a way not disimilar to a DDOS attack.

TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast

said by Sarah See Profile :

My friend spent about 9 million hours tracking band members down and getting permission and signing waivers to videotape and getting permission for me to upload it, and then Comcast decides it's not allowed.
He can upload to a sever not using P2P apps like bittorent.
PDXPLT

join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR


2 edits
Legal or Illegal doesn't matter

The issue is whether or not P2P violates the TOS for the Service. Is Cox the same as Comcast in prohibiting P2P?

IMHO, you can hardly call it "abuse" when you use the service for something that you agreed you wouldn't use it for when you signed up, and the ISP then disrupts it. Yea, maybe the ISP let it slide for awhile, but it was inevitable that the party would end eventually.

Don't like it? Find a broadband provider that allowed P2P in their TOS, and move to the area they serve. Or convince Congress to prohibit ISP's from placing restrictions such as this in their Service Agreements ('hope you have deep pockets).
jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA


1 edit

Re: Legal or Illegal doesn't matter ...

Of course when the TOS changes so often that you can't keep up with it, there's a problem. Isn't it great that companies can change their TOS but users can't. The only change the customer can make is going somewhere else. And the competition is playing the same game. OLIGOPOLY!!!
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20

Re: Legal or Illegal doesn't matter ...

You also agreed that they would/could change the TOS at anytime... so if they changed it.. you knew it could. Last time I checked, cable doesn't put you in lame and P*ssy contracts like phone does...
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..."
jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA

2 edits

Re: Legal or Illegal doesn't matter ...

I dunno, it's starting to look that way. What good is a contract when one side can change the terms at will... That's an unfair advantage.

funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype

Re: Legal or Illegal doesn't matter ...

said by jjeffeory See Profile :

I dunno, it's starting to look that way. What go is a contract when one side can change the terms at will... That's an unfair advantage.
It's a complex problem inherent to service providers of open-ended subscription services: cable TV, ISP, credit cards, mobile phones, ...

Write to your state and federal legislators to get it changed. Meanwhile, there are websites and software programs that will watch a page for you and notify you whenever it changes.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon USA
Are you affected by Comcast's RST forging? How to test it! -or- Read my original report.
jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA


1 edit

Re: Legal or Illegal doesn't matter ...

Thanks for the information. There's also the issue of the unconscionability of the TOS for the average consumer in the first place. Joe6 Pack simply doesn't understand what is going on. The language is written in such a way that the average user is at a great disadvantage. On the other end of the TOS, the writer is very sophisticated and knows how they're limiting the user. So if something changes, the user doesn't understand the consequences until there's a problem.
wierdo

join:2001-02-16
Tulsa, OK
·Future Nine Corpor..
·Teliax VOIP

said by PDXPLT See Profile :

IMHO, you can hardly call it "abuse" when you use the service for something that you agreed you wouldn't use it for when you signed up, and the ISP then disrupts it. Yea, maybe the ISP let it slide for awhile, but it was inevitable that the party would end eventually.
I can call it abuse. They're doing this crap (with BT..I haven't tested eDonkey) to lines purchased from Cox Business, which specifically allow servers.

I can't even seed from my server in San Diego to my home connection in Tulsa.
kingofdsl

join:2002-12-11
Afton, OK

How is it abuse when Cox owns the network?

This is conclusive proof that Cox is interfering with eDonkey uploads by abusing the RST (abort/reset) flag.

--Robb Topolski
=====================================================
How is it abuse when Cox owns the network?

See 9 replies to this post
SilverSurfer

join:2007-08-19

Tip of the Iceberg

Until a law is passed that makes it financially unpleasant for providers to block/throttle/discriminate against certain kinds of traffic on the network, providers will continue to play this game with the users.

The key is that significant numbers of users must bitch en masse sufficient to make it a PR nightmare for those providers who base their advertising claims on "lightning fast" speeds when the reality is closer to lightning fast speeds based on the network traffic that the provider arbitrarily decides it will allow on its network. Nothing less than NN will cure these kind of games.

See 17 replies to this post

JTRockville
Data Ho
Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
clubs:

Comcast doesn't just "threaten" to terminate subscribers

They actually do terminate subscribers.

dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
·Comcast

Re: Comcast doesn't just "threaten" to terminate subscribers

said by JTRockville See Profile :

They actually do terminate abusers.
Fixed that for you.
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera
axus

join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL

Bittorrent works very fast for me on Cox

I love Cox!

Haha. Anyways, I don't need anything from Bittorrent very often, but when I've used it the transfer has been very fast. It sounds like an eDonkey-only thing, but that makes little sense because it can't be the majority of traffic they get.

My total bandwidth usage is pretty low, even shared between 4 people. I've had the net connection go out a couple times the last week, sort of, a DHCP release and renew would get it going again.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

Re: Bittorrent works very fast for me on Cox

It's coming. They are hosing up BT in several markets already.

ztmike
Mark for moderation
Premium
join:2001-08-02
Michigan City, IN
·Comcast


1 edit

Here we go again..


I don't see why people on this site are agreeing with this crap these isp's are pulling..

Notice how Comcast started it all and now other isp's are catching on to the idea..its only going to spread to other isp's and get worse.

Unless someone takes a stand against this crap and stop it before it gets REALLY bad.

**I wonder whats going with the lawsuits Comcast is currently going threw...no updates on them DSLR?
--
"I am the worst president in U.S history, I'm either stupid or dumb most of the time, but people still believe me." George W. Bush

See 17 replies to this post

gaforces
United We Stand, Divided We Fall

join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA

Dont block me bro!

Sounds like cable companys are testing the waters to make thier flawed networks keep bringing home the bacon ...

Dont block a protocol just because people abuse it, take actions against the abusers, not everyone.

Torrent is a very popular, useful, and valuable technology for millions of people who dont abuse the network.

See 7 replies to this post

DaSneaky1D
one wall to block them all
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
·Charter Pipeline

Your doctor solely communicates with you....

Let's say your doctor solely communicates with you via traditional mail. Everyday, you and your doctor send multiple letters to each other, your residential mailbox to his mailbox. Due to the large amount of message exchanges, you encode each letter with a tracking process to verify that each letter is read with the intended response.

One day, the local letter carrier notices how much mail they are now carrying, and in an attempt to lessen his own burden, he decides to toss a few of your coorespondances (figuring it's not really that important considering the amount of letters that are already exchanged), yet continues to get your bills to you.

After you notice that letters are missing, you and your doctor determine that neither are at fault and conclude that the letter carrier is the problem. When he's confronted, he simply says, "your exchanges makes my job harder to get mail to other mail boxes."

Now, the USPS is responsible for delivering mail through its system. If an object is proved to be dangerous to the system, USPS employees, and end users, they take procautions to prevent damage/harm. Is it really up to the letter carrier, though, to determine that your exchanges are such a burden to effectively deliver that they can simply be disregarded...as long as your other "important" letters are unaffected?
--
:: my trivial ramblings ::

See 43 replies to this post

DotMac4
Shill H8r
Premium
join:2007-10-26
Huntington Beach, CA

Why do they (Cox) care?

Unlike Comcast or Time Warner, Cox has monthly caps clearly stated in their TOS/AUP in terms of both month upload and download limits. If someone is abusing their service with use exceeding the published caps, send out a nastygram.

Unlike Comcast, Cox can't use the network management argument. Their monthly caps are their network management.

See 7 replies to this post

dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
·Comcast

Comcast Inviso-Caps!

I'll stick with the Comcast Inviso-Caps any day!
60GB for the highest Cox tier?
While that would not affect me, I do have friends that hit 100 - 150GB per month on Comcast and a 60GB cap would be "unpleasant" for them.
Everyone wants a stated cap - screw that!
Look at what Cox didLook at some of the other capped services have as stated limits. No thanks!

Sandvine? Meh!
I have moved on to a better source for my *stuff*.
Trust me, I max out my line and no upload is required!
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera
jsouth
Jsouth

join:2000-12-12
Wichita, KS

Re: Comcast Inviso-Caps!

Yes. Cox stated their caps, but they are rarely enforced.
--
Bush bashing is old. How about more solutions instead?

dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
·Comcast

Re: Comcast Inviso-Caps!

said by jsouth See Profile :

Yes. Cox stated their caps, but they are rarely enforced.
Like I said, I'll stick with Inviso that cruises in the 200-300 GB range.
Remember, *I* rarely hit 30GB per month. But if I ever get the urge...
Comcast doesn't enforce any cap, they warn for Network Degradation. No numbers.
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera

funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype

My use of the word 'Abuse'

Some have taken issue with my use of the word 'Abuse' with regards to Cox and Comcast using the RST flag to tear down TCP connections.

It's an 'abuse' of the specific purpose the RST flag in a packet header.

The RST flag is to be used only by an endpoint in response to a SYN packet when a port is not open, or if an endpoint detects an unrecoverable error condition that requires both endpoints to drop the socket and start over. No intermediate devices should be sending RST and because of this fact it is an abuse of the RST flag.

--Robb Topolski

References: IETF RFC 793, BCP 60
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon USA
Are you affected by Comcast's RST forging? How to test it! -or- Read my original report.

DaSneaky1D
one wall to block them all
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou

Re: My use of the word 'Abuse'

To further support the point:

»tools.ietf.org/html/bcp60

Da Geek Kid

join:2003-10-11
Mclean, VA

where's the surprise?

Another normal thing Monopolistic companies do...

See 6 replies to this post

gatorkram
Spelling and Grammer impared
Premium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
clubs:
·Embarq
·linode

Who owns the network

Why do people keep saying, such and such isp owns the network, and thus they are free and welcome to do anything with it they wish?

Unless I am confused here, why would cox, or comcast, or any other isp have a network, if they didn't have end users paying the bills, and having the desire to use it?

On another point, is it my understanding, the way the protocol is being disrupted, affects not only people on the cox, or comcast network, but is it also affecting people on other networks, because the technology they are using, sends forged packets in both directions.
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death!
»/testhistory/661871/4f240

dallash
Premium
join:2001-08-17
Little Rock, AR
clubs:

Hooray for Cox..

Go get 'em. Preserve the network for people who don't have a "something for nothing" mentality.

CCNnorthcali

join:2004-03-07
Tempe, AZ
clubs:

Re: Hooray for Cox..

I sure bet you're happy they don't filter something you use.

anannny

@comcast.net

Preserve the network for anyone who pays for it, to use any way they want without the average net surfer with a "goodboy syndrome" to stick their nose up the paying customers ass.

»www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21820808/wi···T1=10613

nona

@comcast.net

drop service

Oh, wait, they're the only cable company. But IF there were a way to hit them in the pocketbook, but wait, there isn't.

Wow, an epiphony. I always wondered why cox advertising was a bit arrogant. Because they can.

Stuff it cox.
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20

Re: drop service

said by nona :

Stuff it cox.
... as said by a Comcast user.. seems you don't have anything to worry about what Cox is doing then, right?
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..."

gatorkram
Spelling and Grammer impared
Premium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
clubs:
·Embarq
·linode

Re: drop service

said by fiberguy See Profile :

said by nona :

Stuff it cox.
... as said by a Comcast user.. seems you don't have anything to worry about what Cox is doing then, right?
I just want to say, I don't use cox, or comcast, but I still worry about how they treat their end users. If we let one isp get away with abusing their users, some of the others might join them.

Considering the recent news items here, it seems this idea is correct.

People seem to fail to realize, these companies are in business to serve us. Without us, they disappear.
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death!
»/testhistory/661871/4f240

IP Pbx

voip

there are various techniques to enhance the performance of peer-to-peer systems.

»www.packet8.net/business_services/
helix139

join:2002-05-11
Lake Wales, FL

not just P2P...

This would explain why ive been having a hell of a time trying to play Madden online on PS3 on Cox broadband. PSNetwork was working all fine and good but everytime I would try to establish a connection to an opponent, it would drop.
Forums » Cox Also Disrupting P2P Traffic


Monday, 30-Nov 15:06:54 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.
page compression OFF