Topic 'Re: Comcast lying?' in forum '' - dslreports.com

Re: Comcast lying?

Fri, 17 Dec 2010 17:17:15 EDT

MxxCon posted : google it

Re: Comcast lying?

Thu, 16 Dec 2010 22:23:21 EDT

Qumahlin posted :

said by MxxCon:

6month old list »p2peducation.pbworks.com/w/page/···rontPage

in the last week blizzard(world of warcraft) alone generated more legit bittorent traffic than all the other US p2p traffic combined!

Proof?

Re: Comcast lying?

Thu, 16 Dec 2010 15:14:06 EDT

cramer posted : You don't get it. They would have to physically REPLACE a surprising amount of hardware throughout the distribution network to support higher frequency return. Amps, converters, bridges, RF switches, etc., etc. These are not devices that can be fixed with a firmware upload. You cannot turn a 10M nic into a 10G nic with new firmware; it's physical components limit the capability.

Could they? Sure. At the cost of billions. You expect the greedy bastards who won't spend single digit millions on D3 upgrades, to wholesale rebuild their entire network? Right. Hold your breath until they do.

Re: Comcast lying?

Thu, 16 Dec 2010 12:26:14 EDT

patcat88 posted : The lower the mhz, the less immuned the channel is, since all the channels under 10 mhz are usually a few khz analog voice channels or low bandwidth digital. Wideband (>1 mhz) systems feature massive amounts of ECC (compared to an analog walkie talkie) and spread spectrum to overcome any interference, even if they are on licensed spectrum. I would assume interference regulations are much stricter on channels used for analog voice rather than ECCed digital data.

Also no cable modem will "transmit" until it hears/finds the downstream channel and CSMA/CDs itself an upload timeslot to auth with the CMTS, same with cellphones. A cable co could just shut down the modems or issue restarts to the modems until the interference modem goes offline and the interference disappears.

Coax doesn't magically leak more at a higher frequency or based on direction. A cable modem and cable box can both jam the node. Sure a broken CE box hooked up to the coax can knock out the node, but that signal won't escape the coax.

upstream split has nothing to do with this »www.kramerfirm.com/pictures/disp···=4&pos=4 upstream and downstream will radiate

The real problem of upstream is the fact you need to replace every last circuit board on the HFC plant for that node. Every amp, repeater, line extender, node, etc. That costs a fortune, well, according to them everything does. The CEO can always use a larger monthly bonus. Just easier to sue FTTH away and use pay-per-gig to cut down on the traffic.

Re: Comcast lying?

Thu, 16 Dec 2010 11:47:39 EDT

miscDude posted :

said by Kylemaul:

You misunderstood my point. My point is that the cable companies do not have to use what's handed to them. Certainly the larger cable companies have the financial means and resources to develop the technology and hardware (yes this would mean new equipment, instead of sticking with 10-year old plus tech gear) for pushing upstream at higher frequencies over their existing copper plant. Doubt it's an issue at all on the fiber side of the plant.

I'm not certain, but I think part of the issue is FCC Regs. I believe there is much stricter controls on anything "broadcasting" at the higher frequencies, and also much more chances of any rf leaks causing serious problems. If someone's box device in the home goes funky and starts sending a lot more crap on the return or screaming down those frequencies, it could cause many more problems with other things using those frequencies in the world.

Re: Comcast lying?

Thu, 16 Dec 2010 08:53:02 EDT

Kylemaul posted : You misunderstood my point. My point is that the cable companies do not have to use what's handed to them. Certainly the larger cable companies have the financial means and resources to develop the technology and hardware (yes this would mean new equipment, instead of sticking with 10-year old plus tech gear) for pushing upstream at higher frequencies over their existing copper plant. Doubt it's an issue at all on the fiber side of the plant.

Re: Comcast lying?

Wed, 15 Dec 2010 17:59:00 EDT

anon posted : What? so you're telling me that what makes broadband so compelling is piracy? That's so shocking to me.

Re: Comcast lying?

Wed, 15 Dec 2010 00:04:41 EDT

cramer posted : Well, no, we can't. The cable system wasn't designed for every TV (endpoint) to talk back into the network. DOCSIS 3 expanding the upstream range to 86MHz is going to cause enough grief. Go check your distribution amp; it's return path is only designed up to 45-50MHz. The cable company hangs the same amps you can buy from solid signal in the grey box outside your house to feed more than one drop. The power amps all over the system are not designed for high frequency returns.

Re: Comcast lying?

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 23:47:59 EDT

newview posted :

said by AlfredNewman:

Comcast lying? Say it ain't so.

I you take everything Comcast says as a lie from the outset, and then invstigate . . . you'll be ahead of the game in the end. Comcast is just so damn devious, it's no damn wonder that people hate them more than the IRS.

Re: Comcast lying?

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 16:54:25 EDT

WernerSchutz posted :

said by fifty nine:

Yeah keep pushing that same old bullshit.

The fact is that most P2P traffic is infringing. Legal content is in the minority by far.

As said above:

"6month old list �p2peducation.pbworks.com/w/page/��rontPage

in the last week blizzard(world of warcraft) alone generated more legit bittorent traffic than all the other US p2p traffic combined!"

Re: Comcast lying?

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 16:07:56 EDT

Kylemaul posted :

said by fifty nine:

...and the fact that the return frequencies are much lower...

This just makes me want to come get the hook out of your mouth.
We can't possibly run upstream at a higher frequency! :D

Re: Comcast lying?

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 14:55:48 EDT

MxxCon posted : 6month old list »p2peducation.pbworks.com/w/page/···rontPage

in the last week blizzard(world of warcraft) alone generated more legit bittorent traffic than all the other US p2p traffic combined!
--
Check out my awesome city of MxxTopia »mxxtopia.myminicity.com/ind or »mxxtopia.myminicity.com (the more people visit, the bigger it is)

Re: Comcast lying?

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 14:55:43 EDT

fifty nine posted : Yeah keep pushing that same old bullshit.

The fact is that most P2P traffic is infringing. Legal content is in the minority by far.

Re: Comcast lying?

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 14:50:56 EDT

WernerSchutz posted :

said by markofmayhem:

I see, said the blind man.

It actually works well. I watch while eating in my kitchen some German train channel that shows views from trains rolling there. Drives my wife crazy, but I have lots of model trains so...

Re: Comcast lying?

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 14:29:31 EDT

markofmayhem posted : I see, said the blind man.

Re: Comcast lying?

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 14:15:39 EDT

WernerSchutz posted :

said by markofmayhem:

I'm on Comcast. How do I upload P2P foreign TV from my home in the USA? I want to upload something, I have no use for it right now and this sounds interesting. Does it come in the mail on DVD? Do I need a C-band satellite? How exactly do I upload foreign television on a Comcast network?

www.tvunetworks.com . The player uses a p2p distributed engine to deliver data.

Re: Comcast lying?

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 14:13:45 EDT

WernerSchutz posted :

said by fifty nine:

Absolutely. But how much P2P foreign TV is legal and non infringing? And how significant a percentage of internet traffic is it, compared to file sharing for copyright infringement?

You know, pushing that argument beyond some limits gets old. Most foreign TV is not infringing, but ENCOURAGED by the broadcasters. Watching German news so I can see what happens in the world internationally besides US news that talk only about fucking panda's in China or some rat infestation in Mexico is legal no matter how much you try to push it as being questionable. As far as percentage I do not care or know, it was a reply to your Linux distros red herring.

Re: Comcast lying?

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 13:57:29 EDT

markofmayhem posted : I'm on Comcast. How do I upload P2P foreign TV from my home in the USA? I want to upload something, I have no use for it right now and this sounds interesting. Does it come in the mail on DVD? Do I need a C-band satellite? How exactly do I upload foreign television on a Comcast network?
--
Show off that hardware: join Team Discovery and Team Helix

Re: Comcast lying?

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 13:47:57 EDT

fifty nine posted :

said by WernerSchutz:

said by fifty nine:

said by WernerSchutz:

Nicely left out was the LEGAL p2p traffic.

Yeah, because most people who use bittorrent are downloading linux distros, lol

Ever heard of foreign TV using p2p transmission ? Did not think so.

Absolutely. But how much P2P foreign TV is legal and non infringing? And how significant a percentage of internet traffic is it, compared to file sharing for copyright infringement?

Re: Comcast lying?

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 13:46:13 EDT

fifty nine posted :

said by backness:

really?

That old chestnut?

Sure. Tell us all of the legal p2p traffic that people are uploading. I'm all ears.

Re: Comcast lying?

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 13:37:09 EDT

WernerSchutz posted :

said by backness:

really?

That old chestnut?

Cable shills do not go to training but only every three years or so.

Re: Comcast lying?

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 13:36:25 EDT

WernerSchutz posted :

said by fifty nine:

said by WernerSchutz:

Nicely left out was the LEGAL p2p traffic.

Yeah, because most people who use bittorrent are downloading linux distros, lol

Ever heard of foreign TV using p2p transmission ? Did not think so.

Re: Comcast lying?

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 12:37:15 EDT

backness posted : really?

That old chestnut?

Re: Comcast lying?

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 12:30:27 EDT

fifty nine posted :

said by WernerSchutz:

Nicely left out was the LEGAL p2p traffic.

Yeah, because most people who use bittorrent are downloading linux distros, lol

Re: Comcast lying?

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 12:28:20 EDT

WernerSchutz posted : Nicely left out was the LEGAL p2p traffic.

Re: Comcast lying?

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 12:16:57 EDT

fifty nine posted :

said by patcat88:

These graphs prove why consumer ISPs are so stingy on upload speeds (sold in units of 128 or 256 kbitps), since if they let all their residential customers upload, alot of the paid peering would turn into free peering due to the ratios leveling out costing massive money for the consumer ISPs.

No, not really. The upload speed problem is simply due to the return plant issues and the fact that the return frequencies are much lower and subject to a lot more noise than the forward path. That's it. No grand conspiracy here, move along.

The average residential user does not really use a lot of upload, at least for legal, non-p2p traffic.

Re: Comcast lying?

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 11:39:50 EDT

patcat88 posted : These graphs prove why consumer ISPs are so stingy on upload speeds (sold in units of 128 or 256 kbitps), since if they let all their residential customers upload, alot of the paid peering would turn into free peering due to the ratios leveling out costing massive money for the consumer ISPs.

Comcast lying?

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 11:29:51 EDT

AlfredNewman posted : Say it ain't so. I know this isn't the first time they've been caught deploying some very shady networking techniques to get more money but this is getting ridiculous