jmccorm
join:2003-08-17
Tulsa, OK
|  reply to MarkyD
Re: [OK] Cox doesn't mess with Bittorrent traffic, does it?
said by MarkyD  :I am starting to think that Cox is using Sandvine in a testing phase in certain markets, OKC being one of them. Actually, I brought up the topic because I suspect that Cox is interfering with my connection.
I recently had the rare need to provide a file to my team via Bittorrent. This time around, I noticed all sorts of problems (individual upstream connections going to 0kB/s after 10 seconds). And all sorts of randomness, rarely able to even come close (not to mention sustain) my self-imposed cap of 30kB/s.
I would have suspected a problem with up my upstream path, but my FTPs are 100% rock solid. Back to Bittorrent... I tried downloading off of a public torrent server, and was able to download just great, but my upload throughput was weak and random.
Example FTP stats...
> 9558016 bytes sent in 140.65Seconds 67.96Kbytes/sec.
Has anyone from Cox answered the original question, or has a response been avoided so far? "Cox doesn't mess with Bittorrent traffic, does it?" |
|
MarkyD
Premium
join:2002-08-20
Oklahoma City, OK
clubs: | I find it interesting that we're both in Oklahoma and noticing similar behavior. |
|
bom619
join:2002-06-14
San Diego, CA | Having unpredictable results in San Diego as well. New behavior... very strange. |
|
robertfl
Premium
join:2005-10-10
Mary Esther, FL | Are ISPs going to bed with the RIAA/MPAA? talk about censorship and btw, their ads say "download movies/music at blazing speeds"
-Rob |
|
jmccorm
join:2003-08-17
Tulsa, OK
| reply to bom619
said by bom619 :Having unpredictable results in San Diego as well. New behavior... very strange. This guy was also complaining about BitTorrent uploading problems, in San Diego, but he got lost in a bunch of noise of people, who aren't Cox employees, telling him there isn't a problem:
»[CA] Packet Shaping, San Diego
I download IPFW and added the following firewall rule...
deny tcp from any to me 6881 tcp flags rst
...and ran another test. In a period of 5 minutes, the firewall rule detected OVER 2000 RST packets on the BitTorrent port.
I didn't run a packet sniffer on both sides of a BitTorrent connection to prove that fake RST packets are being generated, but I think I've proved to my own satisfaction that Cox is engaging in Comcast-like behavior. Even still, I want an answer from a Cox employee who can speak authoritatively on this.
The question, again: "Does Cox interfere, in any way, with BitTorrent traffic?" |
|
Pyrion
Liquid Metal Nanomorph
join:2001-12-01
Poway, CA
clubs:
 ·Cox HSI
| reply to robertfl
said by robertfl :Are ISPs going to bed with the RIAA/MPAA? talk about censorship and btw, their ads say "download movies/music at blazing speeds" -Rob Note the lack of the keyword "illegally" in that statement.
--
"There is much pleasure to be gained from useless knowledge." - Bertrand Russell |
|
jmccorm
join:2003-08-17
Tulsa, OK
| said by Pyrion :Are ISPs going to bed with the RIAA/MPAA? talk about censorship and btw, their ads say "download movies/music at blazing speeds"
Note the lack of the keyword "illegally" in that statement.
I think that you both have a good question for Cox, just you are asking it in different ways:
Assuming Cox is interfering with BitTorrent...
1] Are they doing this to partially curtail piracy on their network?
2] Or are they doing it to preserve more free bandwidth on their network? |
|
Pyrion
Liquid Metal Nanomorph
join:2001-12-01
Poway, CA
clubs: | I'm not asking a question, I'm pointing out a flaw in reasoning. |
|
