| Comcast responds »news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080109/tc_···fcc_dc_1
Comcast Corp said on Wednesday that it would cooperate with an investigation by U.S. regulators into how it manages some Internet traffic on its network, but again denied it had interfered with file-sharing services.
"Comcast does not, has not, and will not block any Web sites or online applications, including peer-to-peer services," David Cohen, a Comcast executive vice president, said in a statement on Wednesday.
Comcast said it used bandwidth management technology on its network that can slow delivery of files, but that it would not block them outright.
"We believe our practices are in accordance with the FCC's policy statement on the Internet, where the Commission clearly recognized that reasonable network management is necessary for the good of all customers," Cohen said. And Comcast walks right thru the FCC loophole. Nothing will change.
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
|
|
| Can you even call it a delay, when it never gets passed? |
|
approval from:
fAcEtIOUs 
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:And Comcast walks right thru the FCC loophole. Nothing will change. Nor should it. They (ISP's) aren't in business to provide some sort of perceived 'God given right' to full on 24/7 internet access. Especially to something as downright egregious as bittorrent. |
|
| said by JasonD :said by fAcEtIOUs:And Comcast walks right thru the FCC loophole. Nothing will change. Nor should it. They (ISP's) aren't in business to provide some sort of perceived 'God given right' to full on 24/7 internet access. Especially to something as downright egregious as bittorrent. If I am paying for the connection, and choose to use it to download perfectly legal content via bit torrent, where exactly is Comcast's right to block that option? And I say block, because thats exactly what their "delay" does.
Keep in mind, this is all just an outsider's opinion. I would never use Comcrap, even if dial up was the only alternative. Anyone who hates their customers as much as they do has no place in my home.
--
Intel Quad Core QX6700 @3500Mhz/Asus P5N32-E SLI/4x 1024Mb Corsair/Seagate 750.10/PNY 7800GTs SLI/Silverstone 850W/Custom water cooler |
|
 espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2
 ·Clear Wireless
| said by Camelot One:If I am paying for the connection, and choose to use it to download perfectly legal content via bit torrent, where exactly is Comcast's right to block that option? And I say block, because thats exactly what their "delay" does. They don't block your ability, as a Comcast customer, to download. They limit the number of upload connections their users able to establish to minimize upstream channel congestion. |
|
| reply to JasonD
said by JasonD :said by fAcEtIOUs:And Comcast walks right thru the FCC loophole. Nothing will change. Nor should it. They (ISP's) aren't in business to provide some sort of perceived 'God given right' to full on 24/7 internet access. Especially to something as downright egregious as bittorrent. They're not the Internet police or the government. And what people use on their connection is none of their business. Bittorrent is not an illegal piece of software to use. |
|
 QumahlinNever Enough TimePremium,MVM
join:2001-10-05
united state | While I agree with you that its not an illegal piece of software, your statement of "what people use on their connection is none of their busines" Please remember YOU do not own your connection. It is not "yours". You essentially are leasing the connection so what you do on it most definitely is their business to an extent and if you choose to find a ISP that agrees with your way of thinking...good luck. Because I promise you even if the ISP isn't openly blocking anything they are still paying close attention to the traffic their customers are sending and receiving.
Don't get me wrong I disagree with them doing this, and orignally their sandvine implementation was not used for this and was actually used to help customers maintain speeds, prioritize certain traffic such as XBL, VOIP, etc. |
|
| reply to JasonD
If I pay for internet access, and nowhere in the contract does it say it will block any kind of internet traffic (remember, Sandvine causes connections to be dropped, not slowed), and the ISP does, in fact block traffic, then they're not abiding by the agreement between them and me, and something needs to be done to show them that they can't do whatever they want, legal or not, and get off scot-free. |
|
ditka_bPremium
join:2001-10-05
Barrington, IL | reply to Camelot One
Yes unfortunately it is A-OK for a few users that use Bittorent legally to be blocked. Just like it's OK to Search every person at the airport to stop the few from ruining the trip for others. |
|
 CabalPremium
join:2007-01-21
Austin, TX
 ·Suddenlink
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
The loophole that allows for network engineers to do their jobs by managing their network? I'm amazed at the short-sightedness of people advocating a flat, unmanaged, unQoS'd Internet.
--
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru? |
|
| said by Cabal:The loophole that allows for network engineers to do their jobs by managing their network? I'm amazed at the short-sightedness of people advocating a flat, unmanaged, unQoS'd Internet. I am not one of them. I would have no problem with Comcast CAPPING the bandwidth for certain protocols, it's this total block that I have objection to. (upstream or down, a block is a block, and a delay is a block, if the "delayed" traffic never gets to it's desination)
--
Intel Quad Core QX6700 @3500Mhz/Asus P5N32-E SLI/4x 1024Mb Corsair/Seagate 750.10/PNY 7800GTs SLI/Silverstone 850W/Custom water cooler |
|
lesopp
join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL
1 edit | reply to ditka_b
It would be interesting to see bittorrent modify their application so that the packets appear to be VoIP, using the same UDP ports as RTP with the DiffSrvices field set to express forwarding. |
|
