LLivingLarge
Better Than You
Premium
join:2003-12-03
Roslyn, NY | Beware of the backlash from your customers.
Comcast: "It's not a big truck. It's a series of tubes!"
--
I know before you even speak that you're wrong. |
|
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
 ·Comcast
| Waiting...
... for this/these thing(s) to screw up and hose some legit, low-comsumption user(s) to the point of stupidity. 
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | It would be easier to deal with overloaded nodes at times than going through caps/filters/traffic shaping techniques.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
alalper
Premium
join:2000-08-20
Philadelphia, PA
| reply to dadkins
said by dadkins  :... for this/these thing(s) to screw up and hose some legit, low-comsumption user(s) to the point of stupidity. If there is a way to screw it up, Comcast will be sure to find it. |
|
pandora
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Outland |  Will this affect VOIP?
Will this affect VOIP for Comcast HSI users? |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| reply to en102
Re: Waiting...
said by en102 :It would be easier to deal with overloaded nodes at times than going through caps/filters/traffic shaping techniques. Only for those CAUSING the overload. For everyone else, this will be an improvement.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| reply to pandora
Re: Will this affect VOIP?
said by pandora :Will this affect VOIP for Comcast HSI users? Unlikely for Comcast's VOIP product, which uses a different priority and data stream separate from the usual internet traffic.
Of course, if you are using a 3rd party VOIP product, it would be slowed down with your other internet traffic as Comcast has no way to differentiate VOIP from other traffic.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
 ·DSL EXTREME
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Waiting...
I don't know.. I've never had issues with an overloaded node on cable or DSL... which is why I see this as a method of rate increase for consumers.
Eg. Lowest tiers ( 1.5Mbps or less) should not need caps, yet they're typically capped hard to purchase a higher rate plan, which is now set as an overloaded node, and requires traffic shaping and/or caps. The end result for the AVERAGE user is not much (i.e. going from a 1.5 to 10Mbps) unless they are bit torrent / gamers / VOD users.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
Corydon
Cultivant son jardin
Premium
join:2008-02-18
Denver, CO
clubs:
·Comcast
| My problem with this...
is that it seems to be reverting to the old practice of invisible caps (although perhaps a bit more user friendly than simply getting cut off altogether).
Will there be an invisible line that's a moving target from month to month that you have to cross before you get sent to the back of the bandwidth bus?
Or is there a bright line you have to cross before this will happen?
If the latter, I can live with it. If that bright line is drawn at 250GB, so much the better.
If this is done using the current arbitrary and invisible cutoff, I'll have a major problem with this. How can you reform your activity and bring it in line with what's acceptable if you don't know what the criteria are?
--
My opinions are my own. No-one else would want them! |
|
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| reply to pandora
Re: Will this affect VOIP?
Yes, theoretically, but unless you are just a crazily heavy phone user, I don't see how it would be an issue in practice. The data rate is only 64 kbits/second maximum (up and down). That's less than 1/4 gigabyte per hour, so it would take 4 hours to flow a gigabyte. I don't think their caps and rate limiters are going to worry much about flows at that low a rate. |
|
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX | reply to LLivingLarge
Re: Beware of the backlash from your customers.
They'd probably just as soon have those customers leave who are up/downloading data at the max rate possible 24 hours a day. Backlash works two ways. |
|
ac6bw
join:2003-11-09
San Jose, CA
1 edit | reply to MyDogHsFleas
Re: Will this affect VOIP?
Actually, at 64 kiloBITS/sec up & down (128 kb/sec total), it would take 17.4 hours to flow a GigaBYTE. |
|
pandora
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Outland
 ·ooma
·Future Nine Corpor..
·Comcast
|  reply to MyDogHsFleas
I think the protocol I'm using is more like 100-120 kbits per second. The sampling rate is something like 64 kbits per second. I don't understand exactly why, but for some reason overhead around the sampled voice seems to about double the bandwidth required over internet vs the actual sampled bandwidth.
--
"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." |
|
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| reply to ac6bw
said by ac6bw :Actually, at 64 kiloBITS/sec, it would take 34.7 hours to flow a GigaBYTE. you are correct sir, forgot to multiply by 8.
 |
|
jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Reston, VA
·Verizon FIOS
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
said by MyDogHsFleas :Yes, theoretically, but unless you are just a crazily heavy phone user, I don't see how it would be an issue in practice. The data rate is only 64 kbits/second maximum (up and down). That's less than 1/4 gigabyte per hour, so it would take 4 hours to flow a gigabyte. I don't think their caps and rate limiters are going to worry much about flows at that low a rate. Well, somebody could be using an online data backup site or downloading a huge file and still expect a 3rd party VOIP call to work. It's not just the phone call. Also, there could be more than one person using the network. |
|
ph03n1x
join:2003-02-15
Sanford, FL
| Must Maintain 100% Policy Transparency
The customers that will be affected by this will never like it, nor should they. However they should demand, unlike previous mystery caps, that Comcast remain 100% transparent about at what point you fall into the "heavy user" category. So far right now it seems like they're setting the bar at 200gigs per month which is a decently high mark. They should not ever consider lowering this limit and should be willing to raise the bar as speeds and bandwidth needs increase. |
|
heathcpe
join:2002-03-19
Brandon, MS | FAP?
quote:
...solely target high-consumption users at peak congestion times....
Could this be something like Hughsnet's Fair Access Policy (FAP)? |
|
Sly
Premium
join:2004-02-20
Johnson City, TN
clubs:
·Packet8
·Callcentric
·Comcast Formerly ..
| reply to LLivingLarge
Re: Beware of the backlash from your customers.
said by LLivingLarge :Comcast: "It's not a big truck. It's a series of tubes!" That exactly what I thought when I read this... "Any customer whose data is temporarily impacted by this technique will find that their data requests must “wait in line” while other customers’ data requests go through first."  |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| reply to en102
Re: Waiting...
said by en102 :It would be easier to deal with overloaded nodes at times than going through caps/filters/traffic shaping techniques. everything I've read indicates the most straightforward, simplest way to deal with congestion is to add capacity. One of the network engineers for Internet2 said they did a trade between caps/filters/shaping/etc. and adding capacity and adding capacity was cheaper and simpler.
I would be willing to bet money the real reason comcast is doing this is to position themselves for the "two tier" internet, with "fast lanes" for their content and those that pay a premium and "slow lanes" for the rest. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA | reply to jmn1207
Re: Will this affect VOIP?
Cost of doing business on a connection with these management techniques. Customers will slowly learn what these new "limitations" mean and how they'll impact their daily use. |
|
