merp
join:2008-03-04
Flower Mound, TX | reply to KCrimson
Re: New TOS / AUP: What's "high volume purposes"?
Yep, tested against three FIOS clients, two FTP clients, and mediafire.com |
|
darcilicious
Cyber Librarian
Premium
join:2001-01-02
Forest Grove, OR
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Comcast
| On my 15/15 connection over wireless (Vista), I got a nearly constant 10mb/s upload over ftp to a non-FiOS host of a 500MB file. |
|
merp
join:2008-03-04
Flower Mound, TX
| said by darcilicious  :On my 15/15 connection over wireless (Vista), I got a nearly constant 10mb/s upload over ftp to a non-FiOS host of a 500MB file. Interesting! I just completed a series of tests that performed similarly, so whatever was cutting me back earlier seems to have gone away. It makes me wonder if what's going on is extremely high utilization during the day. The most suspicious part of this is the hard plateaus. It doesn't make any sense, unless there are literally only four bandwidth tiers in the aggregation router, being 2, 5, 8, and 15 Mbit, the point being that when a channel saturates, it kicks all the ONTs on the saturated segment down one notch to make room. I have no idea how we'd verify this without someone literally walking to all their neighbors for some combined testing, but it would make for an interesting experiment. |
|
birdfeedr
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI | reply to nekote
With a 20/5 connection wired with Win2K to a non-fios connected ftp, I had some variability, but essentially it was 20 minutes of 4.6Mbps upload before I cancelled the transfer. At its slowest it was 3.6, fastest at 4.9Mbps. |
|
GeekNJ
Premium
join:2000-09-23
Waldwick, NJ
| reply to Karl Bode
said by Karl Bode :Are we sure this is a new TOS change? Here's the email I received:
quote:
Effective March 4, 2008 - Important Information Regarding Replacement Of Your Verizon Internet Access Service Terms Of Service
Effective March 4, 2008, the current Verizon Internet Access Service Terms of Service will be replaced by a revised and reordered set of terms and conditions entitled Verizon Online Terms of Service (“VOL Terms”). The VOL Terms are designed to help our subscribers locate terms of interest relating to Verizon Online’s Internet access and other products and services, and to present the service terms and acceptable use policy in a format that is easy to follow. Beginning on March 4, 2008, the VOL Terms will govern your rights and obligations, and ours, with respect to your use of the services we offer.
Described below are some of the changes reflected in the VOL Terms. However, we recommend that you review the entire VOL Terms to familiarize yourself with them. Your continued use of your Verizon Online Services after the above effective date will constitute your agreement to the VOL Terms.
The VOL Terms can be accessed by clicking on the "Policies and Terms of Service" link (www2.verizon.net/policies) at the bottom of any page of our Website.
Here is an overview of some of the changes reflected in the VOL Terms:
1. Reordered and Consolidated Provisions. We have consolidated and reordered a number of sections to put certain information at the beginning of the VOL Terms. These changes involve important terms like the duration and methods for accepting the VOL Terms, provisions allowing for revisions to the VOL Terms, account use and responsibilities, service availability and changes to the services we offer.
2. Restated Acceptable Use Policy (AUP). We have streamlined our Acceptable Use Policy, which now consists of the following four sections: General Policy, Specific Examples of AUP Violations, Usenet Policy and Posting Restrictions, and Copyright Infringement /Repeat Infringer Policy. The AUP is set out in Attachment A to the VOL Terms.
3. New Attachment B, Additional Services Terms. We have added a new Attachment B that provides, in one place, product-specific terms and conditions that pertain to the following services: Personal Web Space and Verizon Online Backup & Sharing, Email and Email Messaging Service, Verizon Internet Security Suite and Verizon Games on Demand.
Again, please take time to review the VOL Terms. Thank you for being a Verizon Online customer.
Verizon Online
--
Tweaked your connection? | Mail Parse | Speed Converter |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| Thanks.
3.7.1 You may not resell the Broadband Service, use it for
high volume purposes, or exceed the bandwidth usage limitations that Verizon may establish from time to time for the Service. I'm guessing this is just a legal C.Y.A. in cases of extreme network abuse, but I'm currently trying to confirm with Verizon. |
|
inajeep4
join:2004-11-07
Sewell, NJ
| reply to nekote
It looks like the same thing that Comcast is doing. Traffic shaping and is misleading. It's to stop people from running web or other types of servers/services out of their homes as well as keeping the network healthy.
Although danclan is saying he sees no such throttling while merp has a pretty graph that shows the step down. hmmmm, the plot thickens. |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| Response from Verizon:
quote:
Hi Karl,
This is not new language and has been in the TOS for some time now.
Obviously we have a responsibility to manage the network so that all
subscribers can use it. As traffic increases on the network, we also
are adding capacity. Our FiOS project is the most obvious example, but
we are also adding capacity in the backbone as we see more demand.
You are correct in saying that this clause simply covers cases of
extreme network abuse -- like denial of service attacks for example.
I think the language is just there to give them a legal advantage. They've been pretty clear that they aren't throttling or capping (for now, hopefully it stays that way). |
|
birdfeedr
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI
·Verizon FIOS
2 edits | reply to inajeep4
said by inajeep4 :Although danclan is saying he sees no such throttling while merp has a pretty graph that shows the step down. hmmmm, the plot thickens. Until merp establishes a bit of a track record here in terms of technical credibility, I would tend to go with danclan's and darcilicious' statements, especially since they correspond to my own experience.
Until there is more credible evidence of VZ throttling bandwidth, I'd chalk it up to other network problems or conditions. There are problems that VZ has to work on and fix. Don't get me wrong. Maybe merp is on one o those infamous 96. address blocks.
That isn't throttling. That's something else.
I'll work with him to test a non-fios destination if he wants.
Edited 6 hours later to add: Youch! What an ass I can be! Merp needs some kind of "credibility" to post an observation? Who the hell am I to pose as some sort of leet azzhat? Sorry, merp, it was a temporary aberration. Usually, I'm happy to help solve problems, not create them. |
|
darcilicious
Cyber Librarian
Premium
join:2001-01-02
Forest Grove, OR
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
| reply to inajeep4
said by inajeep4 :Although danclan is saying he sees no such throttling while merp has a pretty graph that shows the step down. hmmmm, the plot thickens. Even merp has since stated he doesn't always see a step down. I suspect it was a temporary network glitch more than any kind of throttling on Verizon's part... |
|
Kannachii
join:2008-03-05
Harrisburg, PA
| reply to nekote
Hmm... I've run into that problem a few times, but what is the actual physical distance for the blocks, and what's a 96 block mean? I'm sorry for these most likely noob question. And was verizon obligated to inform their customers? Because I only found out through this forum after testing my connection and seeing extremely below what it should have been.
I hope someone can answer my noob-ish questions, I thought I understood this stuff but I'm being confused. |
|
darcilicious
Cyber Librarian
Premium
join:2001-01-02
Forest Grove, OR
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
| said by Kannachii : Hmm... I've run into that problem a few times, Do you mean upload speed problems? If so, can you describe your set up in more detail? (e.g. your speed plan from Verizon, your OS, wireless or wired, etc).
but what is the actual physical distance for the blocks, and what's a 96 block mean? We're talking about IP address blocks -- you are assigned a public IP address, usually starting with 71, 77, 96, etc. An IP address can look like: 96.123.234.12 for example. You can find yours here:
»/whois
And was verizon obligated to inform their customers? Because I only found out through this forum after testing my connection and seeing extremely below what it should have been.
I hope someone can answer my noob-ish questions, I thought I understood this stuff but I'm being confused.
Verizon rarely informs its customers of anything 
As a new user of this site, you might want to start here:
»/tweaks
Read everything very carefully and follow the instructions very carefully and folks will be more than happy to help you troubleshoot your speed issues. |
|
birdfeedr
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI
·Verizon FIOS
| reply to Kannachii
said by Kannachii :what's a 96 block mean? Some people pull a 96.xx.xx.xx IP when there router boots up. For instance, I am on 96.233.151.xx address. Sometimes on one of those addresses, websites load slowly if at all, speed tests are in the crapper, and it looks like it tends to be on the download side. Uploads are typically ok.
Not all 96. block addresses are the same. I have had problems in the past, which disappeared as soon as I got a 71. or 72. block address. But the one I am on now is just fine.
Some addresses are crap. |
|
Kannachii
join:2008-03-05
Harrisburg, PA | reply to nekote
alright. will do. and thank you. |
|
NOCMan
Verizon Fios User
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Flower Mound, TX
| reply to nekote
I live in FM too and never saw that happening.
Of course I do not abuse my connection.
Incidentially we tried downloading a HD movie from Apple onto our Apple TV and it moved at 300k for 3 hours. Though I could run speed tests just fine. I sure hope it's not VZ mukcing with the connection.
--
Mac Chatter
»www.macchatter.net |
|
darcilicious
Cyber Librarian
Premium
join:2001-01-02
Forest Grove, OR
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
| said by NOCMan :Of course I do not abuse my connection. But since there's no definition of "abuse", how can you know for sure?
Incidentially we tried downloading a HD movie from Apple onto our Apple TV and it moved at 300k for 3 hours.
I've never had full speed when downloading movies or songs from Apple/iTunes. The best real life test in my experience is using Usenet (from a real service provider, not Verizon's!) and opening all 10 connections. I have consistently maxed out my download connections (6mb when with Comcast, 15mb now with FiOS). |
|
danclan
join:2005-11-01
Midlothian, VA
·Verizon FIOS
| Its very likely that MERP is seeing normal server/workstation scaling due to latency on the wire. The BDP can change as latency changes and thus his speed out bound.
Also the server may initially burst and scale down accordingly. This is pretty common technique for server to use as optimization is not always throughly employed.
So i think he is seeing a pretty typical response from his workstation. Using a different transfer method/product would quite possibly yield better results.
and toss yet another wrinkle other monitoring/av/fw products could also be playing havoc so...with all these variables im not going to slam MERP for what he is seeing.
If I dismissed his claims out hand I didn't mean to give that impression.
If Verizon was actually throttling outbound I do think there would be a massive uproar from those using the service as it would be spotted rather quickly by those who use it heavily. |
|
merp
join:2008-03-04
Flower Mound, TX
| Okay, some additional details. I've configured my Powermac workstation as a DMZ host in the Actiontec. I'm running an FTP and HTTP server, with the HTTP server configured for a high port. Regardless of service, regardless of remote host, when the connections are initiated inbound to my FiOS, I see the stairstep effect shown in the image I posted. Remote clients include:
the workstation on my desk at the office
Two FIOS hosts in Flower Mound
A FIOS host in Corinth (the source of the screenshot)
During all these tests, I would start and stop uploads to mediafire.com. From the office workstation, I would run simultaneous transfers from the FTP and HTTP server. IN every case, regardless of activity, the FTP and HTTP streams would stairstep down to 1.5-2Mbit. Stopping one transfer reduced my utilization by 200KB/s, with the remaining stream remaining constant, i.e. not accelerating to consume the now-free additional 200KB/s. When running the upload to mediafire, same result. When transferring to the Flower Mound FIOS hosts, they presented similar behavior, starting out fast, and stair-stepping to 200KB/s. Adding/removing transfers made no change in existing transfer speed or network utilization on my system. While the transfers were running, I made multiple copies across my local network to a laptop I have connected to the same gigabit switch here, and at no time did adding or removing that load change the 200KB/s transfers.
There were two or three outliers. During a transfer to one of the Flower Mound FIOS hosts, the stream started at 600KB/s (the remote is 5/2 service), then stair-stepped to 200KB/s, then after a period of time, stair-stepped back to 400KB/s, then 600KB/s. During one of the Mediafire.com uploads, I experienced similar behavior.
I had a 96.x.x.x IP since about December, but after attempting to configure the Actiontec for bridging, I was unable to DHCP a public address, requiring a call to support to force-release the IP. I now have a 71.x.x.x address, like I did when I first got the service in August.
This is all very weird, and there seems to be no significant rhyme or reason to the behavior. At this point, all I can surmise is that there is a bug in the firmware at the fiber termination point, or a poorly configured router at the CO.
Any thoughts would be appreciated. |
|
