Re: Dont think so in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r20342379 en Thu, 03 Dec 2009 08:30:32 EDT Thu, 03 Dec 2009 08:30:32 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20348708 LadyCash : You have it right. P2P and the like effect Comcast customers. My biggest complaint is the time school lets out till about 1-2 am in the morning. My kids even complain. It comes to a crawl and/or during the mid point of that time frame.

NOTE: I do not allow P2P or anything like that on my computers. And I have complete control over the kids' computer. They cannot download or update anything. :D

I live in a neighborhood with a good many kids (mostly teens). I figure the next neighborhood down the main drag is on our node also. They have a good number of kids. I am going to assume almost all of them are on Comcast HSI since DSL shortened their distance from CO and would not renew my contract. Therefore, either you are on Comcast HSI or dail-up. Most parents would get their little "Johnny" or "Susie" HSI, why they cannot let their little one be forced to use dail-up. *sarcasm*

A cyber pipe line can only handle so much. And if the guy before me opens his line full throttle then it will trinkle my way.

It is pretty bad when I need to do update my webpage and have to leave it run all night to get it down.

Of course I hope that will be different now that I upgraded to Blast. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20348708 Thu, 17 Apr 2008 11:09:10 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20346420 koitsu :
said by phattieg See Profile :

I have not noticed a single problem with torrent files I receive or send to folks on the network myself.
I can't reproduce it here (in the Bay Area) either, and I've spent quite a bit of time looking at layer 2-7 packets coming in off the wire.

All this means is that Comcast doesn't have a Sandvine configured for use, or possibly even deployed, in our areas. Nothing's stopping them from doing that, however, which is why I'm so concerned. ISPs being silent about such things doesn't sit well with me... :-)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20346420 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 21:55:10 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20345563 fonzbear2000 :
said by jt44 :

you dont like it because then you cant download song for free anymore. stop braking the law and pay for the music and videos you wants.
Tell the RIAA to stop being so greedy and lower prices and I'll stop getting free music.
--
I wish qwest would die! I want FIOS!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20345563 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 19:19:40 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20345447 lordofwhee : As has already been proved, ISPs are scared to death of being what a vast majority of consumers want them to be: a dumb pipe. If all they do is provide a fast, reliable connection, with no content, they make less money than a slow, intermittent-at-best connection with buttloads of content they get paid to have, and what company in the US (or, really, most countries) is going to do something because it's what's right/what the consumer wants?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20345447 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 19:02:13 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20345344 anon : Comcast wants to make due with compression and limited connections to the CMTS's without having to spend extra for a bigger pipe to the customers area.
Docsis 3.0 is going to be a joke. The current connections can't handle the bandwidth requirements.
Capacity planning is still not going well and never will from what I can tell.

Yeah they will throttle your traffic because when they put 300-400 people on the same node all sharing the same pipe they have to.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20345344 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 18:43:26 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20344959 espaeth :
said by root9 See Profile :

good, and you realise that tudmax = senior network & systems analyst?
Lots of people on this site claim to be network admins, technology professionals, BOFHs, etc. Who cares? Just look at the folks with Ph.Ds that found proof that Comcast was issuing TCP resets to all traffic, and only later had it pointed out to them that they were overrunning the NAT tables of SOHO routing devices.

If you want to be taken seriously, try posting something that is true and independently verifiable. Posting utter crap and then bragging about your glorious title just makes you a bigger joke.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20344959 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:28:04 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20344750 Jovi :
said by ender7074 See Profile :

How about you ISPs just concentrate on giving everyone a fast and reliable connection. That alone seems to be a pretty big task for you. Just concentrate on that. It's not your job to filter packets.
I hear a bingo. ;)
--
"Where's my coffee? Oh. I guess it's my turn to make it." :(]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20344750 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:52:23 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20344021 root9 : good, and you realise that tudmax = senior network & systems analyst?
also has worked on Canadian, US and European infrastructure, backbone and ISP level hosting, etc.

and do you realise that most major ISP's are pushing their contect, media and other crap across the wire while throttling rest of internet, which they shouldn't be since they are only an ISP?

I'll add: to have phone and internet on same line is ok, to also add TV, HDTV or any other crap is killing your internet by default.

--
Fight for your rights or loose them!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20344021 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:40:47 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343928 bent : I don't usually do this, but:

ROFL!

all wired connections can handle 12 Mbps dwld & 3.5 Mbps uplds 24/7 with all users on at same time
You do realize you are posting on a tech site, right? Spouting some BS like that might fly on www.bitkiddie.com, but not here.
--
»www.lp.org/issues/family-budget.shtml

"That government is best which governs least" - Thoreau]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343928 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:25:13 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343909 tx_tower : while i agree that comcasts practices are horrible; part of providing a fast and reliable connection is filtering and prioritizing, you people dont seem to understand what heavy p2p usage can do to a network, it essentially amounts to a low grade DoS attack by ones own customers.

A simple solution would be to limit the number of simultaneous connection an individual customer can make, outline this in the ToS along with the speed. problem solved

said by ender7074 See Profile :

How about you ISPs just concentrate on giving everyone a fast and reliable connection. That alone seems to be a pretty big task for you. Just concentrate on that. It's not your job to filter packets.
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343909 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:20:52 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343901 openbox9 : Umm, ok. I guess it must be so...because you say it should be.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343901 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:19:49 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343772 root9 : Please go do some real studying instead of being fed by Big Business.

try:
Internet history
Internet Authority
Wikipedia
google articles related to infrastructure and network management
stats of all kinds

I've been dealing with Big Biz and their lies for over 40 yrs :p
--
Fight for your rights or loose them!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343772 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 13:54:21 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343743 bent : Straight out his ass...

:uhh:]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343743 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 13:49:51 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343671 Ahrenl : Why should it matter?

How many guns are used in shootings?

How many drunk drivers are drinking alclohol? Or driving cars?

Should we ban everything that could be used in an illegal act? ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343671 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 13:38:48 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343665 LeftOfSanity :
said by root9 See Profile :

again bull ... all wired connections can handle 12 Mbps dwld & 3.5 Mbps uplds 24/7 with all users on at same time.
Comcast has not been fixing their last mile and that's why they have bandwidth probs.

It doesn't matter whether traffic is legit or not ,, PPL have rights. Internet was rejected by DOD and given to universities and likes so it can be used for FREE sharing of information for betterment of everyone on this planet!
What? Where did you pull that info from? Or is that your opinion.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343665 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 13:37:54 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343651 phattieg :
said by jt44 :

you dont like it because then you cant download song for free anymore. stop braking the law and pay for the music and videos you wants.
braking.... In a sentence...

I was braking real hard to avoid hitting the pedestrian.

breaking... In a sentence...

I feel like breaking your neck, but I would be breaking the law if I did that.

Gets them everytime, just like then, than, they're, there, their, etc... Sorry reading wasn't a favorite in school...
--
SIPPhone/Gizmo # 17476200648 / PIMPNET Chatline / Ran by Asterisk & Slackware 10.1.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343651 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 13:35:28 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343618 root9 : again bull ... all wired connections can handle 12 Mbps dwld & 3.5 Mbps uplds 24/7 with all users on at same time.
Comcast has not been fixing their last mile and that's why they have bandwidth probs.

It doesn't matter whether traffic is legit or not ,, PPL have rights. Internet was rejected by DOD and given to universities and likes so it can be used for FREE sharing of information for betterment of everyone on this planet!
--
Fight for your rights or loose them!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343618 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 13:30:13 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343610 phattieg : I have not noticed a single problem with torrent files I receive or send to folks on the network myself. I have been trying to catch this problem in the act, but maybe since I only download a torrent about once or twice a week, and they are about 2 gigs worth of info, I guess I am not being looked at. Or perhaps the 240 gigs of data that I don't really share because I don't want to be stupid and have the **AA's at me might be the reason. I don't know, what I DO know is I don't have any issues using BitTorrent clients. And you know, I have been an Azureus user for years, opting for that over BitTorrent because I like the interface better... Maybe thats why I don't have a problem, because they have some plugin that is suppose to work around it. Well, wait, no, this topic has been going on for a long time, but yet I have only recently got that plugin, so thats not it. And Ethereal on both my Linux box and my Windows machine are not showing RST packets. Sorry for you guys and your luck, maybe you have more traffic than me... Oh well, good luck :p :)
--
SIPPhone/Gizmo # 17476200648 / PIMPNET Chatline / Ran by Asterisk & Slackware 10.1.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343610 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 13:28:39 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343578 root9 : These have been the rules all along, check your Internet history. All protocols fall under these roles :p
I don't care what Comcast says, they are wrong/illegal/immoral/unethical and that's final!
--
Fight for your rights or loose them!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343578 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 13:24:06 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343504 bent :
said by root9 See Profile :

4- protect "their own" network from attacks [user responsible for their own security]
People saturating their connections 24/7 to share American Idol on a network not designed for 100% saturation, but peak usage, IS an attack.

You wanna make sure that the latest boy band singles are available to everyone for free? Pony up the $300 for a T1, and nobody is gonna care if you saturate it.

What I'd really like to see is a study showing how much p2p traffic is "legit" and how much of it is illegal sharing of copyrighted works.
--
»www.lp.org/issues/family-budget.shtml

"That government is best which governs least" - Thoreau]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343504 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 13:14:08 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343413 anon : you dont like it because then you cant download song for free anymore. stop braking the law and pay for the music and videos you wants. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343413 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 12:59:09 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343386 openbox9 :
said by root9 See Profile :

ISP [Internet Service Provider] RULES:
1- provide a connection to Internet
2- provide speeds a customer pays for
3- provide services customer pays for and that are available anywhere on the Internet
4- protect "their own" network from attacks [user responsible for their own security]
5- provide the best quality of service at best prices
Where did those "rules" come from? No need to throttle TCP? Hah! Even if that were true, what about the other protocols? As for your "digging into privacy" comment....I seriously doubt Comcast gives a rat's arse what is posted on wikileaks if it's not about them.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20343386 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 12:55:38 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342868 jonnyb : No comment....]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342868 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:25:09 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342841 root9 :
said by jonnyb See Profile :

Its there responsibility to filter packets when it affects there network.
That is the biggest load of Bull I've ever heard.

ISP [Internet Service Provider] RULES:
1- provide a connection to Internet
2- provide speeds a customer pays for
3- provide services customer pays for and that are available anywhere on the Internet
4- protect "their own" network from attacks [user responsible for their own security]
5- provide the best quality of service at best prices

TCP/IP has it's own checks and sums and there is NO need what-so-ever to throttle, TCP is self controlling already and takes care of any congestion on it's own!

Anything that Comcast or any other ISP freaks about is actually about digging into privacy of users. This whole subject of throttling is really about preventing users from posting information on big corporations and their illegal activities, which they consider as copyright protected. Hence we must push for Net Neutrality in all areas!

Use everything encrypted or be persecuted
See »wikileaks.org

Senior Network & Systems Analyst
--
Fight for your rights or loose them!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342841 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:20:33 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342820 koitsu :
said by jonnyb See Profile :

I dont know what the problem is sir they are saying that they are wiling to work with the p2p issues as long as it is being used for legal uses so why is that an issue are you using it for something other than that, and if you are then good you deserve to be throttled.

--
Making life hard for others since 1977.
I speak for myself and not my employer/affiliates of my employer.
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342820 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:17:03 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342777 koitsu :
said by halfband See Profile :

You want A and B, you can get it, but it is a business class connection. Unfortunately, it is not a "little bit more" it is a lot more.
Ahh, this discussion. I go through this about once a year with someone, and it always results in the same thing: lack of acceptance.

Here's a dose of reality, from someone who works solely with "business-class" tiers (read: backbone providers such as Abovenet, Level 3, Verizon/MCI, AT&T, Telia, InterNAP, and others, a.k.a. the "big boys" who all ISPs peer with). (I'm sure espaeth See Profile will come out of the woodwork and spank me though...)

There's only two differences between a "business-class" connection and a consumer/residential connection: an SLA, and (sometimes) prior notice of maintenances.

Nothing stops your circuit (in the case of cable, your coax or related CMTS) from going down because you have a "business-class" connection. You aren't on a physically separate network. Technicians do not treat network repair any differently depending upon what "class" of customer you are. Support representatives still continue to have absolutely no clue about their own scheduled maintenances, their own downtimes, or their own outages. You go through the same rigmarole as residential users do, just talking to different people. You get the same overall cluelessness in most cases, though.

In fact, I would go so far as to say that consumer-class connections are actually better in some regards, because:

1) When there's a problem (such as TCP RST injection!), there's a significantly larger percentage of the populous who notice and complain,
2) When there's a major outage that lasts multiple hours, consumers (given the choice) will change providers. You can't do this with a business-class connection, due to contractual obligations.

The amusing part is that with commerical-grade connections, there's a significantly smaller customer base. This means chances are the customer won't notice a 30 second blip as a technician cleans some fibre.

The SLA will get you nothing more than your account representative telling you "We're sorry for the interruption in service, but it falls within our 99.5% uptime, so thanks for playing", which ultimately makes you wonder what you're really paying for.

It really isn't that much different when you have a larger pipe (e.g. a residential cable connection compared to a full OC12). It's the same bull**** regardless. Believe me, I deal with this on a daily basis!

The only time a business-class connection proves to be useful is when the provider you're getting service from provides you a direct circuit from the A to Z end, and owns the actual copper or transport medium inbetween. In that case, you can usually get someone clueful, because there's less red tape to deal with.

A real-life example would be Abovenet, who actually leases some of their backbone fibre from Level 3. Level 3 gets their fibre from OnFiber. OnFiber performs maintenance one night, and mucks something up. Level 3 "might" notice, but probably doesn't care because OnFibre told them of the maintenance. But Abovenet has no idea what's going on...

If you call Abovenet during this situation and ask "What's the deal? We pay for an OC48, and right now our SONET link to your is dark." Abovenet will spend a few hours figuring out that the circuit actually rides a Level 3-owned pair, and will contact Level 3, who will tell them "Uh, we... hmm... we'll get back to you". OnFiber finishes up their maintenance, Level 3 is happy, and suddenly the OC48 comes up. Abovenet will then call you and ask "Are you still down?" "No, but we want to know what happened anyways" "Right, uh, we'll get you an RFO in a few days..." The RFO will come, and it'll say there was a service interruption caused by "vendor maintenance".

This situation will continue to repeat itself indefinitely, and nothing ever changes. That's how the real world works, believe it or not. It's depressing, because the core of the problem is that no one cares enough to make it right.

My point is there are tradeoffs, every choice impacts some other aspect of the system. It is very hard to do something that wins on all fronts.
In that regard, I agree. Yes, there has to be trade-offs. But you must keep in mind that DSLR/BBR consists of broadband-centric visitors: people who want the Internet and ISPs to be up 24x7x365, and expect honest, reliable service. Injecting TCP RST into customers' TCP sessions based on whatever Comcast deems necessary at that moment in time is in no way honest or reliable. Thus, DSLR/BBR people bitch more, and bitch louder.

That said, it would do Comcast well to consider changing their method of throttling. Even though I pay US$70/month, I have no real qualms with throttling. I have qualms with the *method* Comcast is using. If they used packet loss or delayed RTT as a form of rate-limiting (which is common), I would be significantly happier. But falsifying packets? NO. This is not acceptable.

You actually make an argument for comcast or other isps to develop a p2p friendly tier that support more, un-filtered upload, but does not have the other costs associated with business level service. Probably would still be expensive, but not the obscene numbers for high reliability business class service.
This sounds somewhat "buzzwordish", and thus I don't understand what you said fully. I think you're referring to Comcast's recent move to work with the BitTorrent folks, hoping to keep the network traffic off their Internet-bound links and local between customers.

I FULLY support that, and I encourage it. I think it's a much better solution to the bandwidth problem, allowing Comcast to keep traffic off their Internet-bound links and local between cable customers.

All I want to see stopped is the current method of falsified TCP packet injection.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342777 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:10:06 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342553 jonnyb :
said by koitsu See Profile :

said by ender7074 See Profile :

How about you ISPs just concentrate on giving everyone a fast and reliable connection. That alone seems to be a pretty big task for you. Just concentrate on that. It's not your job to filter packets.
I don't mean to dissect your wording, but, re: filtering packets:

At least let people opt-out of certain filtering mechanisms. For example, I'm fine with ISPs filtering TCP/UDP 137-139, 445, etc. (SMB/CIFS sharing) for obvious reasons.

On the other hand, I have *major* qualms over Comcast injecting falsified/spoofed TCP RST into existing TCP streams as a form of rate-limiting. I don't care if it's being done on BitTorrent traffic or *all* TCP traffic -- it's a bad idea, for a lot of reasons.

I'd love to know who this "Bill of Rights and Responsibilities" caters to, because it definitely doesn't to the average customer/consumer.
I dont know what the problem is sir they are saying that they are wiling to work with the p2p issues as long as it is being used for legal uses so why is that an issue are you using it for something other than that, and if you are then good you deserve to be throttled.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342553 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 10:22:13 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342530 jonnyb : Its there responsibility to filter packets when it affects there network.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342530 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 10:18:45 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342506 halfband :
said by koitsu See Profile :

I have no qualms paying a little bit more for something that's less "tainted", but Comcast doesn't work that way. They're applying said TCP injection to all customers, not those who are paying less.

So what exactly is your point?
You want A and B, you can get it, but it is a business class connection. Unfortunately, it is not a "little bit more" it is a lot more.
My point is there are tradeoffs, every choice impacts some other aspect of the system. It is very hard to do something that wins on all fronts.

You actually make an argument for comcast or other isps to develop a p2p friendly tier that supports more, un-filtered upload, but does not have the other costs associated with business level service. Probably would still be expensive, but not the obscene numbers for high reliability business class service.
--
Registered Bandwidth Offender #40812]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342506 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 10:15:27 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342467 koitsu :
said by halfband See Profile :

You can have any two of the three choices below:
A) More bandwidth to support p2p
B) No filtering or throttling.
C) No add on costs to rates to support p2p use.

Someone has to make a choice here, who is it going to be?
Simple: A and B.

I have no qualms paying a little bit more for something that's less "tainted", but Comcast doesn't work that way. They're applying said TCP injection to all customers, not those who are paying less.

So what exactly is your point?

I pay US$70.20/month just for Internet access. This is by no means affordable for lower or lower-middle class. Admittedly broadband should be US$20-30/month, tops -- and regardless of how much you pay, you should be getting a clean, manipulation-free connection.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342467 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 10:07:14 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342430 halfband : You can have any two of the three choices below:
A) More bandwidth to support p2p
B) No filtering or throttling.
C) No add on costs to rates to support p2p use.

Someone has to make a choice here, who is it going to be?
--
Registered Bandwidth Offender #40812]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342430 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 09:59:28 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342379 koitsu :
said by ender7074 See Profile :

How about you ISPs just concentrate on giving everyone a fast and reliable connection. That alone seems to be a pretty big task for you. Just concentrate on that. It's not your job to filter packets.
I don't mean to dissect your wording, but, re: filtering packets:

At least let people opt-out of certain filtering mechanisms. For example, I'm fine with ISPs filtering TCP/UDP 137-139, 445, etc. (SMB/CIFS sharing) for obvious reasons.

On the other hand, I have *major* qualms over Comcast injecting falsified/spoofed TCP RST into existing TCP streams as a form of rate-limiting. I don't care if it's being done on BitTorrent traffic or *all* TCP traffic -- it's a bad idea, for a lot of reasons.

I'd love to know who this "Bill of Rights and Responsibilities" caters to, because it definitely doesn't to the average customer/consumer.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342379 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 09:46:22 EDT Re: Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342356 dispatcher21 :
said by ender7074 See Profile :

How about you ISPs just concentrate on giving everyone a fast and reliable connection. That alone seems to be a pretty big task for you. Just concentrate on that. It's not your job to filter packets.
I agree.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342356 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 09:41:08 EDT Dont think so http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342294 ender7074 : How about you ISPs just concentrate on giving everyone a fast and reliable connection. That alone seems to be a pretty big task for you. Just concentrate on that. It's not your job to filter packets. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20342294 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 09:27:53 EDT