Comcast Controversy Doesn't Help Sandvine Stock > yay sandvine

reply to haplo2112

Re: yay sandvine

I can't believe some of you are comparing weapons of mass destruction to a piece of hardware that does QoS on the Internet, no different compared to many of your DSL/Cable routers do at home on your intranet today.

Ah, hyprocisy at it's best!

All the folks at Sandvine did was take something Linksys, for example, is already doing for the home and built it on a larger scale.
--
Series tied 3-3 vs Leafs...GO SENS GO

ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

reply to caco
Do you work for Allot, Ellacoya (Arbor) or Cisco? All of these companies (and many more) sell equipment capable of detecting bittorrent and throttling it.

ISP's do not buy this equipment to spoil your fun; they buy it to make their networks more bearable when they are overloaded. Maybe, if ISPs are no longer allowed to use Sandvine equipment to mitigate the effects of congestion, they will increase the bandwidth of their networks instead; but do you think they'll do that for no extra charge?

reply to SSX4life
You make some rather far reaching statements in your post. Scientist have been inventing things through out the ages that benefit man, some in ways we might not expect at first glance but to suggest that these people should be held responsible on any level for their inventions is mad, sounds like the rantings of a socialist. Your assertion that the two nuclear devices dropped on Japan towards the end of WWII only seemed to affect innocents is misplaced and simply wrong. You fail to note that the Japanese attacked the US without justification and without provocation,(I have family that died in that attack can you say the same?)that during the course of WWII the Japanese committed all manner of atrocities against the Koreans, the Chinese, Malays and the Filipino's not to mention the barbaric treatment of US prisoners of war. Dropping the nuclear bombs on Japan in the end saved many hundreds of thousands more people forestalling an invasion of mainland Japan. Also note that at the time we were ending this war through the use of nuclear technology the Japanese were in fact researching and working on their own nuclear weapon as were the Russians and Germans. Our decision to use nuclear bombs probably saved untold numbers of people on several continents.
Sometimes in order to secure the freedoms and security of people we need to take drastic actions such as war, but by the same measure those things used in limited war also benefit mankind and do so for many years. The benefits derived from harnessing the atoms in nuclear materials, chemistry, physics and the other scientist far out weight any negative use. Finally this is a legal company (Sandvine) making a legal product, providing jobs and and economy when has this been a bad thing? In the final analysis while you are just another American bashing socialist with an agenda companies like Sandvine are contributing to our economy providing necessary services, what are you providing?

reply to Deadpool
QoS isn't what got Sandvine into trouble.

1. Their inventive use of forging or injecting reset packets violated the Internet Standards and had no business on the open Internet.

2. Not only did they allow customers to buy the product with the knowledge that they would use it in secret, they marketed it apparently promising their own non-disclosure as part of the deal. The marketing, in fact, often included the assurance that the interference would be transparent (invisible) to the end user.

3. In 2003/2004, their intention was to encourage P2P transfers to form within the walls of an ISP, resulting in a reduced number of active sessions going through an ISPs boundary gateway. It didn't slow uploads or downloads, instead it intelligently tried to reduce the amount flowing through transit/backbone gateways. By 2005, Sandvine's invention became a way for CATV MSOs to kill P2P connections even if they never strayed from the ISPs network. (My testing with both Comcast and my analysis of tests performed on Cox demonstrated this fact.)

reply to aajs

reply to Deadpool
Deadpool works for Bell, by the way. Bell employs Sandvine technology.

Thought it should be made clear.

LOL! A non-disclosed conflict of interest. How very Sandvine-customer like.

((Okay, just kidding... I couldn't resist the cheap shot.))

reply to Deadpool

said by Deadpool:

Ah, hyprocisy at it's best!

reply to stevephl
I love how you justify the killing of civilians because of something that their armed forces did. That sounds familiar, oh yeah, it's what terrorists do.

Yes, SOME Japanese did horrible things during the war, so did some Americans, Canadians, Brits, Germans and prettymuch every country who has ever gone to war. If everyone followed your logic, we would all be dead.

reply to funchords
uhmm. Sandvine didn't exist until 1999. Not sure how they were encouraging p2p in 1993/1994, or inventing a way for CATV MSOs to kill P2P connections in 1995.

See »www.sandvine.com/about_us/default.asp

Year Founded: 2001

reply to Sean8

--
Series tied 3-3 vs Leafs...GO SENS GO

reply to lolerskatez
Crap -- I often do that mistake. In that post, I meant 200? instead of 199?. Add 10 years to everything there.

DPI was not even a market segment in 199?

Thanks for pointing that out.

reply to funchords

--
Series tied 3-3 vs Leafs...GO SENS GO

I'll dispute whether you can throttle anything by breaking a connection and replacing it with nothing. A much wiser choice on their part would have been to simply mimick what a congested network would do and start randomly throwing away packets.

Once again, congestion is not a new problem, and the Internet is already built to handle it. There is nobody running around in a suit and tie visiting buyers with the advice of "don't buy anything -- there are at least 10 RFCs with the 'Internet Standard' label already explaining how to handle networking congestion."

The problem is that Sandvine perfected a method of performing TCP packet forgery, which was an awesome feat -- but worth little unless they could sell it. So, using P2P as a bogeyman, they convinced buyers that they had a new problem and that their solution was the solution.

Well, it wasn't a new problem.

Back in the early 1990s (and this time, I do have the decade correct), file transfers took up roughly the same percentages (40%-60%) of bandwidth use as it does now. User behavior hasn't changed, only the protocol has. Back then, the preeminent method was FTP. These days, its P2P.

The lesson: You can't throttle progress, nor should you try.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
"We don't throttle any traffic," -Charlie Douglas, Comcast spokesman, on this report.

reply to funchords
To add one more interesting point to all of this. If comcast weren't scared to deploy the sandvine product in the critical network path, you wouldn't even know what was going on. Packets would slow down, and no one would be any wiser.

Instead, they put them in an offline situation (like most reporting software), and are required to use RST packets instead of just dropping packets outright.

I think you even identified this in your previous posts.

I am curious what happens when the RSTs stop being sent. What will everyone complain about then? There would be no packet forgery, just 'queueing'.

reply to Deadpool