US Cable Support > Cox HSI > Cox dropping (not blocking) P2P traffic

reply to coxxsuxx

Re: Cox dropping (not blocking) P2P traffic

reply to coxxsuxx
So are they pushing all of us to get a business account? Then WTF didn't they take my suggestions for packages/pricing then? Heres what I posted before (or close to it)

1)1.5/256 "light package" $24.00
2)5.0/512 "preferred package" $35.00
3)6.0/786 "premium package" $45.00
4)15.0/2.5 "home office/heavy surfer package (no ports blocked) $65.00

If Cox did this (or something similar) without the BS that were going through now then I think Cox will be gaining new customers vs losing to DSL/FIOS

Ohh and if they didn't require us to get "basic cable" to get the "savings" then that would be cool too.

You guys have to remember that Cox is trying to make a profit. However if we didn't have all of this BS added and ports blocked, latency issues and this crap...then we would all be happy campers.

(Come on guys listen to your customers for once and get a little competitive)

Rob

reply to afx114
Well, I found this thread when I went to try a BT download, and it would appear that I'm not the only angry Cox customer in Humboldt County, CA. I guess we're either some sort of test for Cox or they've just decided to go from being lax up here (I don't think they generally enforced the monthly 40GB down/10GB up cap) to shutting down all sketchy traffic (maybe because of the relatively thin pipe leading out of the area).

I find this particularly offensive for three reasons:
1) Cox actually has an established cumulative monthly up/down cap; if their network is having so much trouble that they have to covertly block P2P traffic, they why the heck don't they just reduce the cap? I'd rather only be allowed 2GB up that I can actually use than five times that when it doesn't work properly.

2) They are specifically lying about it. I went ahead and talked to a customer rep, and his response was--I quote verbatim--"It is not [a cox issue], you need to change your settings.", then went on to curtly say that they don't do support for BT so I'm on my own. This is clearly not the case, as the experience of others here illustrates.

3) BT has the most legit traffic of any of the P2P systems; in fact the way I noticed it wasn't working was trying to download the short film "Blue", which is available free, but only as a torrent. Since they already crack down hard on "infringing" filenames, can't they at least leave legit BT stuff alone?

There is only one other high speed provider in Humboldt, SBC DSL, which I'll be switching to promptly now that I have confirmation it's not just me; I checked that same torrent at a friend's house, and SBC apparently doesn't mind if you use the connection you're paying for.

Now I feel really bad for recommending Cox to some of my clients--they may not use BT now, but they're going to com a-complanin' if they ever try.

I'm not too sure here... You say that Cox is blocking BT, but I haven't had any issues with BT, and continue to upload at 92k. If they were to block it, why not do so across the network?

Also, given the rash of people from other ISPs reporting issues with BT, and other p2p clients, could this not be something else effecting you, and them?

Thats not to say that cox is not blocking it, but I find it really unlikely, as it would block lots of legitimate traffic. I use BT to get fire training videos my department makes out to other departments, as well as see videos from them. It is by far the best way to transfer any large file, and the most efficient way for any network.
--
Plvres crapvlas qvam gladivs

I agree completely that blocking BT would block a lot of legit traffic, but that doesn't change the fact that that seems to be what they're doing.

Two weeks ago, the last time I tried anything on BT, it worked fine. Two days ago, with no changes whatsoever, it functions exactly as if the incoming port is firewalled, even if I'm hooked directly to the modem and turn my firewall off. And it would seem as if I'm not alone among Humboldt customers.

As to why, this is total conspiracy theory but the news posted here that Cox is looking to sell some of their rural properties, including Humboldt, could certainly be a reason. After all, blocking all BT would significantly reduce overall network traffic (particularly in a college town), and since annoyed subscribers won't have had time to jump ship to SBC yet (and may never), it'll make the market look a lot better to a potential buyer--same number of subscriptions, half the bandwidth of last month!

If nothing else, it's certainly suspicious timing.

OK this is getting old.

What is Cox doing is wrong
What were doing is *wrong* (but then again what the "industry" is doing to the artists is *wrong*)

From all of the stories i've read and heard on our tech shows on our little network I've never seen so much greed in all of my life.

What Cox is doing is their are covering their ass so the industry doesn't nag them for us end users to *download illegal mp3s*

The RIAA wants one thing.. money. If you purchase CDs the artists get something crappy like $.99 cents per cd sold. So you have purchased a $20 dollar disc yet the artists are starving.. what's wrong with this?

If you purchase CD's you support GREED download the songs (in good quality mp3's) burn a CD and figure out a way to support the artist directly saying "thanks for the tunes.. heres $10 bucks for your album I downloaded"

From the tests done we can NOT proove that Cox is blocking these ports. I have opened up the right ports on the router and firewall and was able to get songs.

You people called the office and said "i can't download these songs" is very illogical. All of the staff there is only trained to read their scripts read your modem and little things. "we don't support this" is a way of covering their own ass since "the call is being monitored AND recorded for "quality" (bull sh*t)"

Let's end this now and until we have PROOF that Cox is blocking these ports (and if they are what are we going to do about it.. bitching gets us nowhere

Were just a number to them. Enjoy the internet, make new friends and enjoy life.

Rob

Winmx doesnt work anymore. Hm....

reply to Smokey

Strange stuff indeed, and where is Humboldt County California anyway? What I find strange is on my roomate's internet line, who has business, all uploads via WinMX went through, while those I tried to do on my modem connected via a splitter to the residential service my roommate got for me, are hardly going through! I'd love to get business and use my existing modem, but since I'm at the same location as my roomate who already has a business connection, I guess I can't get my own bandwidth for my use can I? He runs some internet streams, and we both agree that we should have our own separate connections to do with as we wish, but from what I heard, I can't have a business line as well as my roomate since we're at the same location? I wish someone from within Cox could just provision my Terayon TJ715X modem which I bought for the 4/768 package or even 1.5/1.5, I mean I'd be willing to pay for it if they'd allow me to have it.

reply to Bigman397
i totally disagree with that statment.it should be my choice to use p2p.i mean after all its my azz on the line not cox.good lord is there no freedom anymore.im in arkansas.and also why is my first hop like 100+ms lol.thinking of going back to dsl..although cox was good while it lasted.oh yea i have talked to tech support until im blue in the face about the first hop being 100+ if not timeout all together..nice support there fellas...ok just had to vent.lol sorry for the grammer fellas.

reply to afx114
Well as of yesterday my WinMX no longer uploads or downloads. I can connect to 4 or 5 primaries and no secondaries. I had to reboot my system and this is what it was like after the reboot. I tried changing ports and it had no effect.

I live in Tucson, Arizona and it appears that Cox is now totally blocking the P2P programs here. Before yesterday I was having the same connection problems with uploads having trouble connecting. Now this

Whats going on for the rest of you???

Anybody know if Qwest DSL is inhibiting P2P programs. The main reason I have HSI is P2P. I don't see any reason to keep Cox if I don't get the service I want.

i doubt qwest blocks it they let u do what ever u want with their service, ofcourse they do follow the gay **aa notices but what isp doesnt

reply to afx114
I asked COX directly if they where "inhibiting" P2P programs. this was their response:

Thank you for your e-mail to Cox Communications. I understand you would
like to know if we are restricting the use of peer to peer programs.

Cox Communications does not restrict the use of any program/software.
However, there are certain ports that are blocked and/or restricted due
to security concerns. For more information about which ports are being
blocked, please click on the following link:

»support.cox.com/sdccommon/asp/co···579e132a

You can also review our Acceptable Use Policy:

»www.cox.com/policy/#Acceptable_Use_Policy

I do hope that I have been able to provide you with the information you
requested. If I have not, or if you have any other inquiry, please do
not hesitate to contact us again.

At »www.cox.com you can order online, check service availability,
access your account, pay your bill and find answers to many commonly
asked questions -- 24 hours a day, 7 days a week at your convenience.

Thank you for choosing Cox Communications as your friend in the digital
age.

Sincerely, STP - Christian C.

I'm in AZ, and having no issues with BT. Cant speak for any other p2p programs.
--
Plvres crapvlas qvam gladivs

reply to afx114
hmmm, i love how all of you guys are just putting up a big banner and say "Hey! I'm over here! I'm the one using up all of your network!". But then again its legal to upload and download gigabytes of data per day isn't it...yes because we all have that much information to share that isn't copyrighted...rrriiiggghhhtttt. Anyways just so you know, i have no problems whatsoever uploading to my ftp server at work at full speed. carry on!

dont be an idiot its 2005 now not 1998. not everyone who transfers a file on the net is a pirate. file sizes have changed a bit. i have 2 gigs just of WoW screenshots on my box. and over 200 gigs of shareware/freeware/demos. and 200 more gigs worth of wavs and high quality videos that ive been working on myself.
so whats your point?

reply to afx114
get PeerGuardian at meth labs . org!!

Sure. Waste more processing power on something that is crap and not needed. Why would we want to block users when this whole thread is about uploads not working because of Cox supposedly doing something?
--
BTK is Caught!!!!

reply to afx114
would XP SP2 and its limited connections(10 syns) have something to do with this? just a thought