Leaked Comcast Memo on Traffic Shaping > Comcasts position on this sounds pretty clear to me

Comcasts position on this sounds pretty clear to me

For me, I hope they are throttling Bittorrent, because the last thing I want is a couple teenagers flooding my local node non-stop with P2P traffic. That affects my enjoyment of the internet.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page

reply to Rick
When it comes to the issue of limiting, capping, etc a user who is maxing out their connection 24/7, I think they have a point. But say so, don't outright LIE about it. Don't use "invisible caps", or caps that vary so much from one node to the next that they can't tell a user what he/she is allowed to use and what they aren't.

But that isn't the issue with the bittorrent traffic. In the areas this technology is being used, they aren't "limiting" or even "delaying" the traffic. They are flat out generating false data to STOP the traffic all together. Most bit torrent clients have the option to set max upload and download speeds. I know this, because I set mine. There is no reason, and no network harm, caused by someone using limited upload/download for legitimate bit torrent traffic.

And for those who want to say it's used for nothing but piracy.....I am a musician. I have released my own albums, and I have released them on bittorrent. They are not pirated, they are my work.
--
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

reply to fAcEtIOUs
So what about the bt users that only use about 50gb, or 25, or hell, even 10 a month? Should they be punished too because there are others that use it in excess?

I barely use 20gb a mo total, so why am I having to subsidize YOUR heavy usage? (In response to RR, not TCH)

reply to Rick

reply to Boogeyman

reply to ztmike
Your position has no merit whatsoever.

Comcast has and is investing heavily in their networks all the time.

Proof of that is in January, I was getting about 4400k speeds with Adelphia.
Now I see 20,000k + with Comcast with Powerboost on the DL side..and almost 2,000k on the upload side.

How can you say that this isn't a great leap forward and progress..and giving we customers a whole lot more for our money.

And, I will note..not a single dime more has been charged for all this.

It is simply amazing that those who complain about this are the ones who expect comcast..or any provider..to give them over THREE HUNDRED GIGS of access per month..for the price of 43.00 a month.

that is outrageous to expect. That kind of speed and bandwidth would cost them THOUSANDS of dollars per month to buy for themselves. And yet..they feel that it should just be handed over to them for this price.

I'm sorry..but 300 gigs per month is NOT a cap at all. It's a number that is in the stratosphere. And, if people are hitting that..then they deserve to have warning letters sent to them and their service cut off.
Comcast..nor any isp..should not have to have their network ruined and the rest of the 95% of we customers affected to make this very small base of customers happy.

What these people SHOULD do is upgrade to a business account..or split their access across a couple providers.

This is a residential service..not their own personal backbone to steal copyrighted material.

This issue is beyond old....
Comcast has now spoken out clearly about it.

And really..it's time to move on.
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic!

reply to ztmike
It's about avoiding capital investment in infrastructure. The sooner the average Comcast user understands that they are nothing but a device that adds money to Comcast's cash reserves, so they can acquire and expand, or just sit on that cash, to the delight of Wall Street analysts, the closer they will be to the nominative societal norm of sanity. Sandvine boxes are cheaper than splitting nodes and running new copper.

Any other explanation is either lunacy or the result of employment by Direct Impact. Or both.

reply to Rick
They are not protecting the network from abusers. That's done if they cut someone off. Instead they are blocking/terminating Bit torrent connections for EVERYONE. It doesn't matter if you transfer a terabyte in a month or only 100MB in a month. The blocking hardware doesn't care how much you transfer. It's going to impact your BT transfers no matter what you transfered in a given month. If it only impacted people that transfered large amounts of data then it wouldn't be getting the press that it is.

reply to TScheisskopf
or they just upgrade where there is direct competition.

People who are low competition footprints are screwed

reply to Rick
That may very well be true, but if they ARE throttling it for the people who use it 24/7 (Which a lot of users say they are getting throttled) why cant they just come out and say "Certain users that are making excessive use of the BT protocol and saturating our nodes have had said traffic throttled for the good of the rest of the node."

I know I am not an excessive bandwidth user most of the time, and I agree that 200gb EVERY month is excessive, there are times when using that amount is reasonable. I mean hell, I pay for 6/768 and usually only use 2/256, but I dont want to be told that I cant max my connection for a few hours here and there because they want to sell everyone on my block 6/768, but we can only use half of it before it starts to affect others and they decide to cut me off. (After a reformat/new computer, I use about 200gb a mo due to updates and having to download and install all the free/shareware I use, and I usually try out a bunch of new ones to see if I like them better, and then for games distributed digitally, like all my Steam games, I just download through Steam instead of trying to find disks and then having to patch what I installed off of the disk.)
*EDIT*
First paragraph edited because it made no sense.

reply to Rick

reply to Rick

reply to Rick
The extent to which this is a problem is the extent to which people are forced to stick with a company that does - or should I say __DOESN'T DO__ these types of things.

I'll just go somewhere else. Anyone who uses BT and seeds will go somehwere else. Anyone who can. It's basically that simple.

Yet there are many who can't. Yes, if Comcast wants to have these types of rules and create these types of situations which require solutions like business accounts and someone to point your fingers at, then let it be. I'll just go somewhere else ASAP.

So the problem is really that Comcast doesn't have any competition - but that's been said a million times before, anyway.

I guess that the way I see it is that the ultimate point of doing what you do, the ultimate point of having a business, the ultimate point of offering a service to customers is to provide a quality product to those customers. Powerboost is a gimmick. The caps are high, yes, but the problem is that Comcast gets folks mixed up. You're as safe downloading 1 gig as you are downloading 200 gigs. If they get you mixed up, they'll cut you off even if you disconnect your modem from the wall and hand-deliver it to your lawyer for safe keeping.

1. There are people being disconnected who are wrongly accused.

2. Comcast is forging packets.

3. Comcast is the only choice for broadband many people have.

That either makes sense to you, or it doesn't.

It's as simple as that.

reply to Boogeyman
Again, I think if you carefully read their statement..you'll see they've said ever way they can..that they are NOT impacting people like you and I.

They ARE managing their network however from abusers for OUR benefit.

Frankly, it would be just plain dumb for them to come out and say exactly what it is they are doing as it relates to THOSE people. Because all THOSE people will do is then use THAT information to work around the issue.

And so, they say it this way.

I really think you have to ask yourself..would someone at THAT level of the company be directing their entire call center staff to tell everyone something that simply isn't true?
That would be just plain dumb.

I think what this all boils down to is you..I..and every person who reasonably uses this service..and who even uses it quite heavily..has nothing to worry about.

And..people who start hitting these outrageous levels that impact us all..have plenty to worry about.

Isn't this what we want..as customers of theirs..looking for a good internet experience?

I sure do. I want them policing the service to make sure we are not impacted by abusers and those who apparently feel that everything in this world should be free.

Remember too..that many of these people have a choice.
They can also upgrade to business level connections.
Or..split their usage among providers.

Comcasts "caps"..are not restrictive for the majority of people. 300 gigs and more is a TON of data.

And, these speeds would cost us thousands per month if we had to buy these pipes ourselves.

It seriously is time for those of us who are not impacted by this..but yet who are paying the price everyday..to stand up to this very small minority and say..it's time they shaped up their acts.

And, it's time for us to support Comcast and their efforts to keep this a great service for the vast majority of us.
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic!

Look, if they can't afford to supply the high speeds of their competitors without overloading their network then perhaps they need to either UPGRADE THEIR NETWORK or STOP OFFERING WHAT THEY CAN'T PROVIDE. If they want to cap connections then they should advertise their cap, it's like a hard drive manufacturer who advertises 10000 rpm drives for sale but doesnt tell you how many Gigs it is because they KNOW that it's way lower than their competitors and no one would buy it.

reply to Rick
I agree that they should be doing something, but I disagree that they are smart enough to tell the truth.

Look at how they liad about the caps at first, then they changed thier story when users started posting the letters stating they were getting capped. Should they have been capped/cut off for excessive use? Yessir. But the company SHOULD have said, yup, we cut off service to the network abusers.

And should they have to say what the limits are? Well, if its a frequently changing number depending on node saturation, then, its reasonable to not expect that number, as long as its a reasonable amount. And yes, I think capping someone at 300gb is reasonable. The MOST I have ever used, was 500gb a month according to D/U meter, and 70% of that was traffic on my home network (I keep most of my media on an older pc because it has more room for HDD's). Now if they want to make a cap of say, 50gb, or 100gb, then they should let us know because a lot of regular users might excede that while normal usage.

I just dont think that the company cares about the customer, its all about company image. If no one notices what they do wrong, they will continue doing it. But when people start noticing it and calling them on it, they do damage control instead of just being up front about it. Its like they are all for screwing the customer untill it affects thier public image. And to me, THATS what is pissing everyone off.

reply to Rick

Yeah-on speedtests you do!

reply to ztmike

Re: Comcasts position on this sounds pretty clear to me

reply to qworster

Re: Yeah-on speedtests you do!