openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | reply to r81984
Re: What a crappy company! They are not limiting the Internet. A tool is only that...a tool. It's how the tool is used that maybe you take issue with. When end users start paying Sandvine for service, then they get a voice, until then, direct your "internet limiting" at the ISPs. FWIW, Comcast appears to be implementing Sandvine's technology with minimal to no noticeable impact to the end users so maybe they are listening  |
|
 r81984Fair and BalancedPremium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·AT&T DSL Service
 ·row44
| They why are they buying it? The point of sandvine technology is to limit the internet which will impact users. If they are not impacting users then the equipment is not working. An ISP and sandvine do not have a right to say what traffic is more important than others that should be left up the end user.
--
For those of you playing a drinking game.... MY FRIENDS! |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | said by r81984:If they are not impacting users then the equipment is not working. Noticeable impact said by r81984: An ISP and sandvine do not have a right to say what traffic is more important than others that should be left up the end user. Sandvine isn't determining traffic priorities. Besides, with Comcast's implementation of Fairshare, priorities are left up to the end user. |
|
|
|
| No they're not. They're throttling users when a node is "congested" instead of simply splitting the node and providing more bandwidth. Any throttling tool will allow an ISP to skip one cycle of upgrading, but after that cycle they are forced to permanently use that tool even as they upgrade. It's a stopgap measure, and doesn't address the real issue of congestion. Only splitting the node will fully address the problem. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | Yes the are. From my understanding, Comcast's current implementation of Fairshare doesn't prioritize specific protocols over others. Therefore, the end user has control over protocol prioritization (at least through Comcast's network).said by sonicmerlin:Any throttling tool will allow an ISP to skip one cycle of upgrading, How did you determine this? Throttling schemas are used to manage peak congestion. Until the congestion is more than intermittently bursty, laying out resources to split nodes doesn't make sense. Having said that, the network engineers should monitor their networks and plan upgrades accordingly.said by sonicmerlin:but after that cycle they are forced to permanently use that tool even as they upgrade. Forced? More like ISPs choose to maintain tools that enable them manage their networks and minimize impacts as traffic eventually bursts to new bandwidth limits. |
|
 espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2
·Clear Wireless
| reply to sonicmerlin
said by sonicmerlin:Any throttling tool will allow an ISP to skip one cycle of upgrading, but after that cycle they are forced to permanently use that tool even as they upgrade. It's a stopgap measure, and doesn't address the real issue of congestion. Only splitting the node will fully address the problem. So called "Fair Access Policies" such as those used by satellite internet providers are systems that allow for the elongation of upgrade cycles. Those systems have a limit at which a hard throttle kicks in that effectively limits the maximum number of bytes any particular user can put on the network.
Fairshare, by contrast, is a completely different system in that it's a prioritization scheme and not a throttle. Your priority on the network is inversely proportional to your amount of bandwidth demand; those who create the least amount of demand get the highest priority.
We're talking about scenarios where the circuit is filled to the point where there is congestion, and congestion usually affects every single connection on the wire. Say you're streaming a HD video which is running along but fills the shared pathway to capacity. When I pick up my phone to make a VoIP call, the extra traffic I add to the line creates a congested condition -- but the impact occurs to both of us. In that state some of my packets get dropped, some of your packets get dropped -- my VoIP call has unusable audio, your video maybe falls behind on buffering.
So if you are streaming video for an hour, and I want to make a 6 minute phone call, your traffic use over the hour was impacted 10% of the time, but my phone call was 100% impacted. FairShare is just a system to even out those odds. If my connection had higher priority than yours, 0% of my 6 minute VoIP call would be impacted, and you'd still have impact to 10% of the duration of your video stream. |
|
