dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
305198
share rss forum feed


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
reply to Combat Chuck

Re: Comcast is using Sandvine to manage P2P Connections

said by Combat Chuck:

If you look at what sandvine product can do it's more than just detect outbound spam. It appears to be more of a general purpose firewall that can do deep packet inspection and take action on what it finds, be that P2P use or outbound spam or a worm.
Just giving the goblin some feedback on his comments. What Comcast does; well, it is their network, none of us get to say how they run it.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


hobgoblin
Sortof Agoblin
Premium
join:2001-11-25
Orchard Park, NY
kudos:11
reply to NormanS
said by NormanS:

It would cost Comcast less to just block outbound port 25 than to spend a wad of money on monitoring hardware which, by my MTA logs, doesn't seem to be working, anyway; assuming that they are employing Sandvine boxes to monitor SMTP traffic.
How much does a Sandvine Box cost?

Hob
--
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."
- Ralph Waldo Emerson


funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:6
reply to paco
said by paco :

funchords stated:

"The users on those forums are not informed."

Wow !!!!! What a blanket statement !!!

I'd say that it is you who are uninformed about the users at the Comcast forums
Sorry.

"The users on those forums are not anywhere as nearly informed as they are here at BBR."

I've been here at BBR for a long time, and I've been a Comcast customer for a long time, too -- and yes, I've been to the forums.

Blanket statement -- okay, but I've seen both blankets. So what's wrong with that?
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon USA
~ Keeper of the D-Link FAQ ~ Did you Search? ~ More features, Free! Join BBR! ~


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12

2 edits
reply to hobgoblin
System glitch double post. How rare.


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
reply to hobgoblin
said by hobgoblin:

How much does a Sandvine Box cost?
How much does it cost to add port 25 to an ACL?
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC

1 recommendation

reply to Morty7
said by Morty7:

Sandvine said it has signed a contract with a Tier 1 U.S. service provider to supply its 10 Gbps Policy Traffic Switch platform.

Comcast is not a Tier 1 provider. In fact, the there are only two Tier 1's on that possible list, Vz and ATT. My hunch is with ATT.
That would be worrisome. Not that it, necessarily would involve me directly; the tier 1 AT&T backbone is part of AT&T Worldnet services, and my routing generally doesn't touch that backbone:
05/13/07 23:19:05 Slow traceroute 74.208.13.161
Trace 74.208.13.161 ...
192.168.102.1 RTT: 1ms TTL:170 (chihiro.aosake.net ok)
192.168.0.1 RTT: 2ms TTL:170 (suzuka.aosake.net ok)
69.105.119.254 RTT: 10ms TTL:170 (adsl-69-105-119-254.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net ok)
64.164.97.67 RTT: 11ms TTL:170 (dist2-vlan50.pltn13.pbi.net ok)
151.164.93.239 RTT: 15ms TTL:170 (No rDNS)
151.164.94.47 RTT: 13ms TTL:170 (ex2-p12-0.eqsjca.sbcglobal.net ok)
151.164.248.250 RTT: 11ms TTL:170 (as174.eqsjca.sbcglobal.net ok)
154.54.6.85 RTT: 12ms TTL:170 (t3-1.mpd01.sjc03.atlas.cogentco.com probable bogus rDNS: No DNS)
154.54.6.81 RTT: 12ms TTL:170 (v3490.mpd01.sjc01.atlas.cogentco.com probable bogus rDNS: No DNS)
154.54.2.53 RTT: 59ms TTL:170 (t7-1.mpd02.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com probable bogus rDNS: No DNS)
154.54.6.41 RTT: 61ms TTL:170 (t2-2.mpd01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com probable bogus rDNS: No DNS)
154.54.2.217 RTT: 61ms TTL:170 (g11-0-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com probable bogus rDNS: No DNS)
66.28.6.238 RTT: 60ms TTL:170 (g0-2.na21.b005948-0.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com probable bogus rDNS: No DNS)
38.112.2.194 RTT: 70ms TTL:170 (schlund-partner.demarc.cogentco.com probable bogus rDNS: No DNS)
74.208.1.65 RTT: 60ms TTL:170 (te-1-1.bb-a.slr.lxa.us.oneandone.net ok)
74.208.1.102 RTT: 60ms TTL:170 (te-1-2.gw-distp-b.slr.lxa.oneandone.net ok)
74.208.1.168 RTT: 62ms TTL:170 (ae-1.gw-prtr-r5-b.slr.lxa.oneandone.net ok)
74.208.13.161 RTT: 78ms TTL: 51 (server.elitebusinesschoice.com ok)
...unless I am pushing/pulling packets where Comcast is at the far end:
05/13/07 23:17:54 Slow traceroute 68.34.175.134
Trace 68.34.175.134 ...
192.168.102.1 RTT: 1ms TTL:170 (chihiro.aosake.net ok)
192.168.0.1 RTT: 3ms TTL:170 (suzuka.aosake.net ok)
69.105.119.254 RTT: 11ms TTL:170 (adsl-69-105-119-254.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net ok)
64.164.97.66 RTT: 11ms TTL:170 (dist1-vlan50.pltn13.pbi.net ok)
151.164.93.231 RTT: 11ms TTL:170 (bb1-g15-0.pltnca.sbcglobal.net ok)
151.164.191.201 RTT: 12ms TTL:170 (ex1-p9-0.eqsjca.sbcglobal.net ok)
12.122.79.101 RTT: 15ms TTL:170 (gar7.sffca.ip.att.net fraudulent rDNS)
12.122.85.142 RTT: 88ms TTL:170 (tbr2033101.sffca.ip.att.net probable bogus rDNS: No DNS)
12.122.10.41 RTT: 88ms TTL:170 (tbr1.sl9mo.ip.att.net fraudulent rDNS)
12.122.10.29 RTT: 87ms TTL:170 (tbr1.wswdc.ip.att.net fraudulent rDNS)
12.122.2.86 RTT: 84ms TTL:170 (tbr2.phlpa.ip.att.net fraudulent rDNS)
12.123.137.213 RTT: 81ms TTL:170 (gar3.phlpa.ip.att.net fraudulent rDNS)
12.118.114.14 RTT: 105ms TTL:170 (No rDNS)
68.86.211.9 RTT: 124ms TTL:170 (te-7-1-ar01.audubon.nj.panjde.comcast.net ok)
68.86.208.26 RTT: 115ms TTL:170 (po-10-ar01.wallingford.pa.panjde.comcast.net ok)
68.86.211.146 RTT: 120ms TTL:170 (po-92-ur01.claymont.de.panjde.comcast.net ok)
68.86.209.98 RTT: 86ms TTL:170 (po-10-ur01.norristown.pa.panjde.comcast.net ok)
68.86.209.102 RTT: 87ms TTL:170 (po-10-ur02.norristown.pa.panjde.comcast.net ok)
68.86.209.169 RTT: 122ms TTL:170 (po-90-ur01.plymouthmtng.pa.panjde.comcast.net ok)
* * * failed
68.34.175.134 RTT: 98ms TTL:109 (c-68-34-175-134.hsd1.pa.comcast.net ok)
But, back before SBC bought them, AT&T set up NSA listening rooms. And, when the company now called, "AT&T", was known as "SBC", CEO Ed Whitacre started making noise about Google getting a "free ride" on "his pipes"; as if it wasn't his customers sending HTTP GET requests down "his pipes" to Google.

This bids fair to become a "Net Neutrality" issue. I can see big money in Hollywood, and political pressure applied to use Sandvine (and Ellacoya) to eliminate the freewheeling nature of the Internet.

--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

tdumaine
Premium
join:2004-03-14
Seattle, WA
Wheres the line when it becomes illegal? If i alter packets going to someones computer, im doing so unauthorized and am in trouble, am i not?


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
said by tdumaine:

Wheres the line when it becomes illegal?
AFAIK, there is no such line under the law, just an ages old Internet tradition codified in the RFCs. To the extent that the RFCs amount to anything akin to a code.
If i alter packets going to someones computer, im doing so unauthorized and am in trouble, am i not?
Probably in violation of one, or another RFC, but not of any law that I am aware of. I am pretty sure that this service would not be offered if it was illegal to alter packets in transit.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

comtec5

join:2006-02-06
Glen Burnie, MD
reply to funchords
we do indeed use sanvines on each cmts


Qumahlin
Never Enough Time
Premium,MVM
join:2001-10-05
united state

3 edits
said by comtec5:

we do indeed use sanvines on each cmts
While you are correct that sandvine is in use and has been for quite some time, it is not used "on" a CMTS. Sandvine works hand in hand with the PacketCable protocol and acts as an application gateway.

This thread is going to garner hate towards sandvine because everyone is basing one users experiences to how things will always work and assuming Sandvine is something installed specifically to block/throttle p2p...that is not the case as there FAR CHEAPER solutions to that issue, many already built into current CMTS's which would negate the need of ever having a Sandvine box and policy server.

Sandvine is an integral application used by quite a few providers that HELPS with bandwidth for P2P, gaming, VOIP, etc. Are there cases where it will cause you to get lower P2P speeds, yes, but there are also cases where it will help with your general latency and will IMPROVE your p2p download speeds.

Sandvine even has a profile for Xbox Live clients (whether this is in use widespread is not known to me, but I know it was used at one point in my area)

Sandvines use at Comcast is not primarily as a P2P blocker, anyone who tells you that is lying or uninformed.
--
Forum Posts:7500

Sadimitsu

join:2005-06-07
Pittsburg, CA

3 edits
It's sure blocking me! I didn't notice it untill yesterday but I can't seed anything on bittorrent now. My ratios are horrible and now I will be banned etc etc. It's not even a slow upload, I really can't seed torrents AT ALL. I get a fat 0 kB/s. I've been a loyal comcast customer for years now, hell even before comcast owned the place and it was @home. I've put up with downtime and crappy service for a very very long time but one good thing i could always say was "When it works it works good" now I can't even say that anymore. I didn't get the higher upload speeds for nothing, I'm paying all this extra money and now I can't even freaking use my upload speed. Someone please tell me, what the hell is my upload for if I can't send anything to people because comcast is blocking me?

Bittorrent is really useless now, i'm sure everyone knows that BT DL speed is connected to your upload speed. If you're not uploading you won't DL anything at a decent speed. Thanks a lot comcast

This is beyond bullshit


CableConvert
Premium
join:2003-12-05
Atlanta, GA
reply to funchords
Click for full size
FYI...Azureus Wiki lists Comcast as blocking seeding
»www.azureuswiki.com/index.php/Ba···_America


Nerdtalker
Working Hard, Or Hardly Working?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-02-18
Tucson, AZ
reply to funchords
Intriguing; has this technology been deployed across all markets? I ask this because I seed at the upstream cap all the time, a number of private trackers I use simply require it, so it's become force-of-habit.

I guess the question becomes whether using traffic prioritization software really is an issue, so long as the behavior is transparent to the user. To be honest, what's ironic about the whole thing is that if this really has been deployed for so long, it's been an amazingly well-guarded secret. The question then becomes, is it really doing anything if nobody has noticed it this long?

Qualitative/subjective analysis aside, I think this really is a non-issue so long as it doesn't adversely affect the end result. I'm pretty pleased overall with latency, especially in online games, and, to be honest, having Comcast do some of the network prioritization for latency-critical protocols makes sense; it's less CPU-load for my m0n0wall.
--
"Some people never see the light till it shines thru bullet holes." -Bruce Cockburn

I'm testing Gmail's spam filters: Broadbandreports1@gmail.com
Spam: 12900+ messages currently using 406 MB.

Sadimitsu

join:2005-06-07
Pittsburg, CA
Believe me buddy its damn noticible, and like you i'm part of sites that demand I upload in return or else I face being banned which is what will happen now that comcast has decided to screw people over. Again.


billygoat

@secureix.com
Hey sad, Why don't you try getting the premium VPN account from secureix.com My upload speeds have remain at the max since I signed up. I, like you, sat at that fat 0 before. 9.95 extra a month to me is worth it. They also have a few day trial for you to test it first.

kcisobderf

join:2002-12-29
Ann Arbor, MI
reply to funchords
For what it's worth, I'm in Ann Arbor, MI, and I can D/L and seed torrents. I don't do much other than apps and texts, but I did make a 1+ ratio on a 12GB file last week. I use uTorrent 1.6.1.

My question is on a different aspect, possibly involving the traffic shaping debate. On that 12GB file, I had upwards of 80 peers, in a swarm of 400 or so. I didn't do much upload over 40kB/s, but other activities, like browsing were painfully slow. I have a 100/1000 card in a PCI slot and network utilization was very low. Is it a matter of my cable "modem", local cable loop, or the alleged Sandvine P2P throttling?

Thanks for any ideas!

Sadimitsu

join:2005-06-07
Pittsburg, CA
reply to billygoat
Thanks a lot for your suggestion, I will try it out.


Obliteration
Premium
join:2005-09-18
Somewhere

4 edits
reply to funchords
Yep, it has been sucking badly lately. I was able to upload 20MB in almost 2 hrs which is horrible. The screenshot is just above to show it. Never had this probably till recently as well.(I try to be nice and only use it for anime releases from Japan but apparently Comcast doesn't like that so barely noticed it)

I'm looking at getting banned from the torrent pretty soon at this rate since anything under .5 is considered pretty bad by most torrents sites .06 isn't going to cut it. If this isn't fixed by Saturday morning, I'm calling Comcast to cancel all their services and switch to AT&T now that they decided to serve DSL here.

$34.99 a month is actually cheaper and only downside is that there is no boost. Up side is no throttling and cheaper.

Signals are great, everything is fine. Pretty sure it is this new Comcast filter as there has been no other variable changes.

EDIT: Worked for a while at full speed before resetting to zero.

I'm also attaching a screen shot of that.(I had it limited at that amount on that second torrent screen shot)

--
The best signature out there.


sddsd

@ey.com
The trick for BT is to turn on encryption, that's the
only way I can seed.


sortofageek
Runs from Clowns
Premium,Mod
join:2001-08-19
kudos:23
reply to funchords


billygoat

@nibble.net
reply to funchords
Try a VPN service guys. Not to mention the additional benefits alongside it.

I am currently using secureix.com


rubytuesday

@comcast.net
reply to funchords


Cabal
Premium
join:2007-01-21
Online petitions are useful and effective.


Scilicet
Spaced Out
Premium
join:2005-04-11
Aurora, CO
kudos:1
reply to funchords
There are some things that you can do to minimize the filtering. One, stop your "Routing and Remote Access Service". Two, in Azureus, Tools --> Options --> Transfer --> Use Lazy Bitfield. If this doesn't help, try encryption.


moko

join:2002-12-22
Fayetteville, GA

1 edit
funchords....that was a great post about whats going on....i just want an isp that does'nt filter anything....and try to tell me what and what not to dl/ul......thats my business.

i look at like a car company selling me a car...and then putting a speed restrictor on it....in-case i might speed and break a law....it is not their business or responsibility.....but them trying to argue that it is.....because it makes them reliable to my bad choice,because they sold me "their" car.....which is wrong,because where all responsible for our own actions.....if i dl/ul something against the riaa for example...they need to come to me,it has nothing at all to do with my isp.

its like me speeding then telling the judge that the car companies need to have some responsibilty in this......because they sold me a car that i could break the law in...and then the judge "seeing my point" goes on and fines the car company too...see how stupid that would be......but some people are stupid

plat2on1

join:2002-08-21
Hopewell Junction, NY
you are just full of bad analogies aren't you.

it has less to do with copyright infringement then it does network integrity. downloading requires user intervention and storage space, if no one is at the computer or you run out of space downloading stops. there is really no limit stopping you from uploading 24/7/365, that's what makes p2p so dangerous.


moko

join:2002-12-22
Fayetteville, GA

3 edits
thats what i think i should be able to do.....if i pay for a certain dl/up unlimited access....i should be able to dl/up 24/7 365 days a year.....not that i do.

if comcast is not selling an "unlimited access" internet service....than i wish they or someone else would

besides....what i was talking about ....was its not comcast's buisness what i dl/ul.... so they should not be "throttling" anything.....and i don't dl/up 24/7 ....only when i do want to.....i should have full speed that i have.....i really dl/up not very much....but if i want something through p2p...an isp should not limit my line because i'm using a p2p program.

plat2on1

join:2002-08-21
Hopewell Junction, NY
said by moko:

thats what i think i should be able to do.....if i pay for a certain dl/up unlimited access....i should be able to dl/up 24/7 365 days a year.....not that i do.

if comcast is not selling an "unlimited access" internet service....than i wish they or someone else would

besides....what i was talking about ....was its not comcast's buisness what i dl/ul.... so they should not be "throttling" anything.....and i don't dl/up 24/7 ....only when i do want to.....i should have full speed that i have.....i really dl/up not very much....but if i want something through p2p...an isp should not limit my line because i'm using a p2p program.
comcast is very clear in what they sell, if you want 24/7/365 then you need a dedicated circuit.

is their network so it is very much their business.


moko

join:2002-12-22
Fayetteville, GA
except for my line to the rest of the network thats not theirs.....i'm paying for that one.....so its not their business what i dl/up on my line to the rest of the networks around the world......i want undisturbed access to it would a dedicated service do that.....or do i have to start my own network


moko

join:2002-12-22
Fayetteville, GA

1 edit
an example of whats wrong with what comcast is doing with p2p is......if i want download a game mod file thats around 500megs....like a battlefield 1942/2 mod....i should be able to dl this file at the speed that i pay for....which sometimes its aviable at a website,then i get the full speed,...but the same file on a p2p program and comcast stops or limits it....and these files are not always on a website with full speed capabilities.....so i go to my p2p which i know lots of people have....and should get my full speed [at my speed would be around 700KBs,after powerboost]but i get blocked.....why?