dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
4
share rss forum feed


fuziwuzi
Not born yesterday
Premium
join:2005-07-01
Atlanta, GA
reply to AVonGauss

Re: Here we go again about bandwidth throttling ...

said by AVonGauss:

said by fuziwuzi:

which in non-BizarroWorld is called "throttling"
I'll ask again, did you take the time to read any of the information provided about how the system actually works?
Yes, I did, and I stand by my statement. You may use all the contortionistic verbage you like, but it all boils down to throttling.
--
***************
I think computer viruses should count as life. I think it says something about human nature that the only form of life we have created so far is purely destructive. We've created life in our own image.
- Stephen Hawking

WernerSchutz

join:2009-08-04
Sugar Land, TX

1 edit

Yes, it is throttling. JLivingood's explanation is good in showing the "nuances" and how CC uses a less draconian derivative.

In CC speak, throttling seems to be a brutish limiting to a specific speed while the version of throttling they use they define as QoS, packet prioritization and congestion management.

In my mind it is throttling, but way better than other alternatives and something I could live with as a compromise.

I personally have not been aware of being affected by it, although I believe I am a heavy user. I believe the company has made great strides in finding compromises with the heavy users and actually trying to resolve issues rather than having a ham fisted approach.


AVonGauss
Premium
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL
reply to fuziwuzi

Not to doubt your word, but the system doesn't operate the way you have described in your prior posts on the subject. Maybe there are some sections in the FAQ or the document itself that are unclear or ambiguous that can be improved upon? It's not a game of contortionistic verbiage, semantics or any other clever expression that you want to come up with. There is a fundamental difference in both concept and implementation between prioritization and a throttle.


AVonGauss
Premium
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL
reply to WernerSchutz

said by WernerSchutz:

In CC speak, throttling seems to be a brutish limiting to a specific speed while the version of throttling they use they define as QoS, packet prioritization and congestion management.

In my mind it is throttling, but way better than other alternatives and something I could live with as a compromise.
If it matters; one of the fundamental differences that makes it a prioritization vs a throttle system is if it was a throttle your throughput would definitely change while because it actually is a prioritization system your throughput may or may not change depending on the actual conditions.


jlivingood
Premium,VIP
join:2007-10-28
Philadelphia, PA
kudos:2

said by AVonGauss:

said by WernerSchutz:

In CC speak, throttling seems to be a brutish limiting to a specific speed while the version of throttling they use they define as QoS, packet prioritization and congestion management.

In my mind it is throttling, but way better than other alternatives and something I could live with as a compromise.
If it matters; one of the fundamental differences that makes it a prioritization vs a throttle system is if it was a throttle your throughput would definitely change while because it actually is a prioritization system your throughput may or may not change depending on the actual conditions.
I've concluded that some people aren't interested in the nuances for whatever reason.* If it was really a throttling system, we'd have lots of people here complaining about seeing XXXkbps for some period of time for all apps, and generally unhappy. Such is life.

In any case, this recent presentation may be of interest to folks on this thread, from a panel discussion I was on last month (12/3/2009): »www.phoenix-center.org/symposium···good.pdf

(Someone from AT&T and from Verizon also presented. The AT&T slides are not posted, but the VZ ones are here »www.phoenix-center.org/symposium···tner.pdf)

* If you don't like the system, what would you do differently is always an interesting question.

Happy New Year!
JL
--
JL
Comcast

WernerSchutz

join:2009-08-04
Sugar Land, TX

said by jlivingood:

said by AVonGauss:

said by WernerSchutz:

In CC speak, throttling seems to be a brutish limiting to a specific speed while the version of throttling they use they define as QoS, packet prioritization and congestion management.

In my mind it is throttling, but way better than other alternatives and something I could live with as a compromise.
If it matters; one of the fundamental differences that makes it a prioritization vs a throttle system is if it was a throttle your throughput would definitely change while because it actually is a prioritization system your throughput may or may not change depending on the actual conditions.
I've concluded that some people aren't interested in the nuances for whatever reason.* If it was really a throttling system, we'd have lots of people here complaining about seeing XXXkbps for some period of time for all apps, and generally unhappy. Such is life.

In any case, this recent presentation may be of interest to folks on this thread, from a panel discussion I was on last month (12/3/2009): »www.phoenix-center.org/symposium···good.pdf

(Someone from AT&T and from Verizon also presented. The AT&T slides are not posted, but the VZ ones are here »www.phoenix-center.org/symposium···tner.pdf)

* If you don't like the system, what would you do differently is always an interesting question.

Happy New Year!
JL
I am interested in the nuances and did not mean to offend you. Although the definition is debatable, it is a good compromise that seems to be working well in the field.


jlivingood
Premium,VIP
join:2007-10-28
Philadelphia, PA
kudos:2

said by WernerSchutz:

I am interested in the nuances and did not mean to offend you. Although the definition is debatable, it is a good compromise that seems to be working well in the field.
You didn't by any means, and in fact you had a complimentary post a page or so back that I appreciated.
--
JL
Comcast