ninjatutle
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA | Don't see a problem here.....
less speed slowdowns due to the pirate crowd. |
|
Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Austin, TX
clubs:
 ·VoicePulse
| said by ninjatutle  :less speed slowdowns due to the pirate crowd. If they didn't constantly oversell their available bandwidth, there wouldn't be an issue to begin with.
--
Intel Quad Core QX6700 @3500Mhz/Asus P5N32-E SLI/4x 1024Mb Corsair/Seagate 750.10/PNY 7800GTs SLI/Silverstone 850W/Custom water cooler |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL
 ·Mediacom
| And if they didn't constantly oversell their available bandwidth, customers wouldn't be seeing 10 Mbps connection for $49/mth. The problem is, the old model of scaling and planning for network usage doesn't play well with a few abusers and some of the new applications/protocols being used. Additionally, it's not necessarily about bandwidth usage, it's also about the number of connections that BT brings to the network. It truly is a hog of a protocol in every respect. Cohen even cockily admits that he designed it to be so. It's a broken design that's become too popular to passively ignore any longer. |
|
swhx7
Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to ninjatutle
Please get your facts straight before you rely on a cliche to make excuses for an abusive practice.
1. File sharing is not only "pirates", it also comprises lots of legal users.
2. Comcast is blocking certain types of transfers regardless of the traffic amount. Customers are prevented from seeding torrents to non-Comcast addresses even if they're using only a little bandwidth.
If it were only a restraint of large bandwidth use, it would be less objectionable. The problem is that it's selective blocking of connections which only approximately correlates with any interests of other users. |
|
digitalfreak
Frodo failed. Bush has the ring
join:2005-12-09
Blacklick, OH | reply to openbox9
You again? |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL | Right back at ya... |
|
MattE
Obama '08
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
 ·North State Commun..
 ·Corporate Colocation
| reply to ninjatutle
said by ninjatutle :less speed slowdowns due to the pirate crowd. I know it seems laughable and a cop-out, but my CentOS 5 DVD went bad, so I have the CentOS 5 DVD and CentOS 5 7 CD set coming down via BT right now. There's 10GB or so in one day via BT.
I try to respect the network though and I limit my torrent client to 100 GLOBAL maximum connections. I throttle it to only about 1/8th of my upload and download during peak hours as well.
It's the script kiddies who leave uTorrent at 400 connections, or worse, 800+ and leave the upload and download to unlimited that cause the issue.
I don't think BT would be such a concern if people were a little more respectful of the network they connect to. |
|
TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast
| reply to openbox9
said by openbox9 :And if they didn't constantly oversell their available bandwidth, customers wouldn't be seeing 10 Mbps connection for $49/mth. The problem is, the old model of scaling and planning for network usage doesn't play well with a few abusers and some of the new applications/protocols being used. Additionally, it's not necessarily about bandwidth usage, it's also about the number of connections that BT brings to the network. It truly is a hog of a protocol in every respect. Cohen even cockily admits that he designed it to be so. It's a broken design that's become too popular to passively ignore any longer. Right on every count. Bittorrent is cost shifting and nothing more.
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL
·Mediacom
| reply to MattE
said by MattE :I don't think BT would be such a concern if people were a little more respectful of the network they connect to. What? Obviously this is your first visit to BBR  Your statement is in contradiction to what many believe in this forum. Yes, if we did a better job policing ourselves, we wouldn't have to worry as much about somebody else doing it...like almost everything else in life. |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY | reply to TK Junk Mail
Yep, you pay with your bandwidth, guess why companies love to distribute things through it. |
|
lordofwhee
join:2007-10-21
Everett, WA
| reply to openbox9
Simple solution: spend the bloody money to upgrade crappy gear. I'd be willing to bet people would be willing to pay more for faster speeds (gasp!), especially if that service didn't drop out every month or so for three days.
Oh, and it's $55 here. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL
·Mediacom
| said by lordofwhee :Simple solution: spend the bloody money to upgrade crappy gear. ISPs are spending money to upgrade the infrastructure. Listen to conference calls and look at the balance sheets for the public companies.said by lordofwhee :I'd be willing to bet people would be willing to pay more for faster speeds (gasp!) Relatively few people are willing to pay more for additional bandwidth, evidenced by the popularity of telecoms' low cost offerings of 768 kbps tiers and cablecos "retention" priced tiers. |
|
MattE
Obama '08
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
·Corporate Colocation
| said by openbox9 :said by lordofwhee :Simple solution: spend the bloody money to upgrade crappy gear. ISPs are spending money to upgrade the infrastructure. Listen to conference calls and look at the balance sheets for the public companies. said by lordofwhee :I'd be willing to bet people would be willing to pay more for faster speeds (gasp!) Relatively few people are willing to pay more for additional bandwidth, evidenced by the popularity of telecoms' low cost offerings of 768 kbps tiers and cablecos "retention" priced tiers. The popularity of those tiers are for the remaining people on dial-up. They are there to get people to upgrade to broadband and nothing more. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL | The retention offers are to obtain new customers? More like to retain customers tired of paying high fees. |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02 | reply to patcat88
Weird huh? Companies who provide bandwidth finding out that people will fill that bandwidth? Outrageous. |
|
MattE
Obama '08
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
·Corporate Colocation
| reply to openbox9
said by openbox9 :The retention offers are to obtain new customers? More like to retain customers tired of paying high fees. The lower speed tiers. |
|
knightmb
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN
·Comcast
·Vonage
·Speakeasy
edit:
January 25th, @06:00PM
| reply to MattE
said by MattE :I try to respect the network though and I limit my torrent client to 100 GLOBAL maximum connections. I throttle it to only about 1/8th of my upload and download during peak hours as well. It's the script kiddies who leave uTorrent at 400 connections, or worse, 800+ and leave the upload and download to unlimited that cause the issue. I don't think BT would be such a concern if people were a little more respectful of the network they connect to. I feel terrible then for leaving mine at a maximum 22,000 connections global then, but only because my router can handle that kind of load doing a 10Mbps download, plus the tcpip.sys hack for windows to disable the 10 half-open connection restriction. But, even with all of that, some torrents hit the 10Mb limit and others barely get over 50 kbps sometimes, so it's hard to say if it's residential customers only or if it excluded business customers like myself as it appears to me anyway. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL
·Mediacom
| reply to MattE
I agree that those tiers are popular in some part for those still utilizing dial-up. However, it only furthers my point that cost does matter and a large number of people are not willing to pay more for service simply for the luxury of having more bandwidth as lordofwhee stated. |
|
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | reply to Karl Bode
Isn't it amazing how they promise you everything but then get pissed if you actually try to take them up on it.
So, they sell you on a fast connection. Then cap you/block you/reset you/filter you if you actually want to use it. |
|
Phattieg
join:2001-04-29
Jacksonville, FL
| reply to Karl Bode
said by Karl Bode :Weird huh? Companies who provide bandwidth finding out that people will fill that bandwidth? Outrageous. Whats outrageous is the fact that said company is only protecting the network from VERY FEW people who are using the protocol enough to cause the problem in the first place. I can tell you I don't have problems with BitTorrent, but I'm using Azereus (misspelled)... I download lots of stuff, and I don't have any issues with completing the download... I think the issue is coming from the folks who host the file, and have 150 people hit them at the same time for the file, then the UBR rejects it by sending an RST packet. That makes sense, because BitTorrent is not bandwidth friendly, so on a 384k upstream, that would suck the life out of your connection.
--
SIPPhone/Gizmo # 17476200648 / PIMPNET Chatline / Ran by Asterisk & Slackware 10.1. |
|
