| reply to will2k
Re: BT slowdowns? Well I'm quite sure I'll cancel my xtreme-I then and just go with regular shaw for the time being. Save me $10 a month that way.
It's lucky for them that I hate telus. |
|
| reply to ShawInsider
Re: BT slowdowns Holy christ, that would explain alot man, is there a workaround for this? Can we find/build an app which relist's the BT protocol in anyway. Regardless, I'm going apeshit with my trouble ticket if that's the case. Could you get the application name or the names of the people responsible. I mean fuck, let's keep looking for solutions to whatever this is doing cause this make take a while. |
|
| reply to will2k
Re: BT slowdowns? ShawInsider:
Does this only affect those with DOCSIS modems? If so, I'd like to know if there's a way to switch to the old blue modem. I'm confused as to why this problem so unevenly affects users. I can't get my connection to go above 10 kB/s, and I'm averaging less than 1kB/s. Yet Silverpig is now getting relatively good speeds. Why has Shaw limited the uploads so severely?
I can understand the need to fix the problem, but this is overkill. I'm sure that many of us would pay more for more bandwidth, and I bet the SOHO plans and such have the same problem. If there was another service provider that allowed more bandwidth, I'd sign up in a second, but we're a little limited here in Vancouver. |
|
| reply to ShawInsider
Re: BT slowdowns "Please note that this should not affect your general internet experience, surfing, online radio, microsoft windows updates, gaming, etc."
I'm pissed off at Shaw.
Uh, what if P2P apps such as BT... er, ok what if a P2P app such as BT were to makeup my general internet experience? In other words, what if I only use BT?
By shaping and controlling their P2P traffic, isn't Shaw essentially denying the customers a portion of the service that they supposedly are trying to provide?
If this is true, then shouldn't there be some sort of fine-print somewhere? And because there isn't some sort of fine-print somewhere, isn't this screaming out, "LAWSUIT"?
Isn't this extreme crap false advertising? Up to 5Mb download and 1Mb upload and in the fine print, EXCEPT WITH P2P APPLICATIONS.
So what if there is a lot of BT traffic in Vancouver? Is their justification of implementing this P2P traffic shaper based upon their bandwidth usage abuse policy? If it is, doesn't that mean that the policy requires reshaping?
Well whatever, enough. It's not much skin off my back to just switch to a provider which doesn't shape their P2P traffic, though I'd kind of hate to lose my email address. Hopefully those other providers don't decide to jump on the bandwagon and implement this P2P traffic shaping device as well. |
|
| reply to taz6067
Re: BT slowdowns? This is not a DOCSIS issue. The question is what hubsite you are at and if there is an Ellacoya installed. Being in North Vancouver (vn.shawcable.net), you should have had an Ellacoya installed in the hubsite there recently, like last 7 days. Apparently the Ellacoya can sniff out P2P packets posing as HTTP; a rumor I heard. The higher ups were very happy with this, as it saved over $2 million in expanding the HFC (Hybrid Fiber Cable) plant (which is of course the proper solution to congestion - build more roads rather than force people to use small cars).
Some hubsites are Terayon proprietary; others are DOCSIS compliant. Some hubsites have both; I don't know which of the top of my head.
As for Silverpig, as he is a member, his resolution xx.shawcable.net is not visible to me, so I don't know.
Note: this would also affect Business Cable Modem users who do lots of P2P, which is a legitmate use. I don't know how many SOHO would fall into this category. This does not affect companies with T1, 10mbps, 100mbps, or random other sizes, of peering or transit internet services, as these are not fed through the Ellacoyas.
As for a work-around, I don't know. This affects me too, in that I used to be a P2P junkie. I'm about to become PVR junkie. I've discovered that there is more to the internet than P2P, and there's more to P2P than porn. I hope that we can convert you to perhaps streaming online video, and maybe that way retain you as a somewhat disgruntled customer. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. Silver lining: the rest of your online experience should be faster; is it? |
|
| To: ShawInsider
so, do you know if shaw is going to stick with this "Ellacoya" or not? if they are, i am switching,
and YES, BT occupies most of my internet experince, other internet experience like gaming and browsing doesnt require high bandwidth anyway... BT is more than just porn, it's what i use to download games, movies, long long long series of anime, etc... |
|
| reply to will2k
Okay guys and gals. . . if this is the case and Shaw really is doing this purposely, there's gotta a way around it somehow. Instead of waiting for Shaw to fix the issue, does anyone have ideas what we can do about it? Of course, there's the option of switching providers but besides that, what other alternatives do we have? |
|
| Heh, lawsuits... |
|
| reply to will2k
ShawInsider: I'm vc.shawcable.net so yeah I'm sure I'm being fed through one of those ellacoyas.
Dammit. I'd gladly pay more if shaw could give us more bandwidth. 10/2 fibre or something would be really really sweet. |
|
| reply to Lets fix it
Shitty, but all you gotta do is read the fineprint, if they want to, we're all screwed. There must be an Ellacoya workaround/masking method out there, I am gonna try and find it. Meanwhile, everyone who didn't "BUY" the fuckin modem can convert to telus, cause this is a joke. I use BT to download my RedvsBlue movies, previews and tons of legal content. I might even take this to the province or the sun for publication if it continues.....
»secure.shaw.ca/policy/termsofuse.html
Users must ensure that their activity does not improperly restrict, inhibit or degrade any other customer’s use of the Services, nor represent (in the sole judgment of Shaw) an unusually large burden on the network itself, such as, but not limited to, peer to peer file sharing programs, serving streaming video or audio, mail, http, ftp, irc, dhcp servers, and multi-user interactive forums. The guidelines for Bandwidth Usage/month for each service package are the following: Shaw High-Speed (with Xtreme-I) - 50 GigaByte; SOHO - 50 GigaByte; Professional - 70 GigaByte; Business - 100 GigaByte (combined download and upload). Business services which are combined with the Xtreme-I upgrade retain the stated Bandwidth Usage/month guidelines. The guidelines for acceptable web site traffic include 2 GigaByte/month for SOHO, Professional, and Business hosting packages. Residential Shaw High Speed and High Speed Lite services do not have specific guidelines of this nature as the Service is not intended for business applications. Shaw reserves the right to set specific limits for Bandwidth Usage and charge for excessive Bandwidth Usage for residential Services at any time. In addition, users must ensure that their activity does not improperly restrict, disrupt, inhibit, degrade or impede Shaw’s ability to deliver the Services and monitor the Services, backbone, network nodes, and/or other network services. |
|
| reply to ShawInsider
C'mon, I'm more than just a disgruntled customer now. 
The reason why I'm angry is because Shaw advertised a service and they gave it to their customers. Now they're modifying that service and it's no longer the same. Obviously with Shaw Extreme, they have bitten off more than they could chew in offering this service to the public and now the customers are paying the price that Shaw doesn't want to. What else could I be except dissatisfied at this point? With this and the fact that at least half of Shaw's tech support/customer service reps suck, I'm going to just switch providers out of spite.
Well I guess that's a whole entire different issue but I'm pretty tired of having the problem blamed on me all the time. I understand that they might get a lot of phone calls from stupids who don't know how to turn their computer on but that's simply no excuse. I'm sure many in this forum would agree. Anyway, I digress.
As for P2P being linked to porn, I think it'd be more accurate if just THE INTERNET was linked to porn instead.
As for the rest of my online experience being faster goes, I'm not really sure that it's faster. I'd be inclined to think that it's actually going slower than it was a week ago.
The BT utilized bandwidth actually caused people to have less than impressive internet experiences? Maybe that was just from Shaw overloading the nodes in certain areas. Or it was them doing something else that was just infinitely stupid because they can't make effective predictions or wipe their asses properly. Excuse me for that comment, but please understand that everyone that I've talked to from Shaw had an IQ lower than my dog, and even then I'm being insulting towards my cute cute dog.
Bottom line: Shaw is effectively trying to change my internet usage habits and I don't want to. If my internet usage was abusive or violating any part of the agreement that I have with them, why wouldn't they address that with me individually? Again, it's because they've bitten off more than they can chew. They didn't realize that BT is such an effective method of file sharing and as a result we have Shaw here trying to do some damage control.
Shaw needs to stop trying to force-feed BS. |
|
| reply to will2k
Here's an another article regarding p2p traffic blocking:
»www.cabledatacomnews.com/mar03/mar03-2.html
Looks like other ISPs are trying the p2p blocking method.
But there's good news(taken from the article)
"But service control vendors argue that these tools will not do the trick because they're not targeted enough to attack the core problem--heavy bandwidth use by a small fraction of broadband subscribers. Instead, the vendors argue, such broad-brush methods may actually backfire on cable operators by confusing, annoying and possibly even enraging a large number of their customers. They especially believe that traffic blocking and capping schemes are doomed to fail.
"You may address the 5% (causing the traffic problems) but you'll make 35% unhappy," says Tom Donnelly, co-founder and vice president of marketing and sales for Sandvine, based in Waterloo, Ont. He notes that a large British MSO, NTL, ran into a storm of opposition last month when it imposed a daily one-gigabyte cap on data downloads by subscribers."
Keep flooding their customer support mailboxes full of complains, they will have to respond somehow. |
|
|
|
| reply to will2k
Looks like it's up to everyone here to send emails off to shaw. Send one to each support address you can find. Make sure they know we know and are pissed. |
|
| nah...
they won't change their plan and back up...
atleast not in a short term...
i will just change to telus for now..
phone them up and ask for any special deals for shaw switch overs... sometimes they do, even though not advertised..  |
|
| reply to ShawInsider
Re: BT slowdowns I should clarify before this gets any further that what I said was not an official position of Shaw Communications Inc., nor that the events I describe actually occurred the way I described them; this was my perception only; I was not present at any meetings about this topic; it was relayed to me through a co-worker.
Please don't bring this up; I need this job and don't want to be fired. I did not mean to offend anyone; my words to were meant to spread the truth as I see it, and to prevent people from troubleshooting this by re-installing Windows and SP2, as I've had to do it too many times and it's such a pain in the ass.
In fact, can the Admin for this forum please remove my previous two posts? Thanks. |
|
| reply to will2k
Re: BT slowdowns? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHH, I found what I beleive to be a fix, it definatly address's the issue we are all having. I don't understand how it works just yet (Random IDENT/IP spoofing for P2P BT downloads) Talks about fighting Ellacoya specifically (Data encryption and how to fight P-Cube, Allot Communication, Expand Networks, Lancope Inc., Ellacoya Networks, Packeteer and similar solutions)
»larytet.sourceforge.net/
The name of the app is RODI, if anyone figures out a way to use it before I do, please post in the forum. Fight the power! |
|
| reply to will2k
Nice job shaze. I'll work on it |
|
| reply to will2k
Seems like it's pre-alpha. There's nothing there that actually works yet. |
|
| reply to silverpig1
Thanks ShawInsider for the info.
Also want to point out that the explanation about WinXP SP2 being the cause is incorrect.
XP SP2 limits 10 concurrent connection "attempts" (i.e. trying to talk to another computer). Once the connection is established, it does not fall into the limit. So SP2 only has effect at the beginning of the download when trying to connection many peers. Once the peers are connected it is not limited. |
|
| reply to will2k
Hmm. . . this sounds like it! Shaw plans to provide VoIP service very soon so they must be using this Ellacoya crap!
"The IP Service Control System from Ellacoya Networks gives broadband operators unprecedented visibility into and control over their networks and services. The Ellacoya system is the only solution in the marketplace to provide a complete picture of subscriber and application network usage trends and the ability to better manage network capacity based on those trends. Ellacoya's IP Service Control System measures traffic by application, activity, and subscriber, and then gives operators the tools to analyze the resulting data through the system's powerful web-based reporting environment. They can then take action to maximize network efficiency with the Ellacoya system by setting policies that prioritize applications during peak and non-peak times, secure the network, and control bandwidth costs. The system also provides a platform for introducing targeted service plans and packages for new offerings such as VoIP, on-line gaming, and movie downloads, so that providers can take advantage of new revenue opportunities." |
|
