SinNombre
join:2004-09-16
Charlotte, NC
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to brianiscool
Re: If you have nothing to hide.
that's naive and contrary to the reason why most ISPs traffic shape or try to lock down popular torrent ports in the first place. even if you aren't trying to "hide" something, alot of companies (read the freakin article, first) limit torrents for completely arbitrary reasons, anyway. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
|  said by SinNombre  :even if you aren't trying to "hide" something, alot of companies (read the freakin article, first) limit torrents for completely arbitrary reasons, anyway. It is not completely arbitrary. They do it because the bittorrent users flood upstream bandwidth and negatively impact other users trying to use limited resources. The only solutions are:
1 - ISPs upgrade infrastructure to provide more upstream bandwidth. But that cost lots of money and WILL significantly increase rates for all users.
2 - block bittorrent traffic so the upgrades aren't necessary.
3 - and my personal favorite - charge mucho extra dollars for those users eating up upstream bandwidth beyond some floor that gets 90% of the users no cost increase, but slaps big charges on the heavy users(worst 10%). They then underwrite the infrastructure upgrade costs.
--
--
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
kinabrew
join:2002-02-01 | 4 - Find out what should be charged to the worst 10% to pay for infrastructure and upgrade costs and then charge that to everyone.
That's what they'll really do. |
|
xsiddalx
join:2005-03-11
Chicago, IL
 ·AT&T Yahoo
| reply to TKJunkMail
tch...
When did ISPs begin purchasing asymmetrical connections?
The only reason upload speeds are generally restricted it due to the business model. People using the internet are like television watchers...we "pull more content" than we "deliver". Bittorent (and skype) attempt to change that.
Without the "spare" upload capacity, the economics of "web hosting", "spam serving", "pr0n distribution" would change drastically. Cynical as I may be, I presume the largest of the publically traded companies are using the upstream for "business class" type services that are relatively legitimate.
In the end, the first ISP (telco/cableco) with the cajones to declare internet access "Port 80" and POP3 will be the one that has declared the "mom and pop and their high school kids" their market. It is coming, along with all of the government privacy mandates...think how long the ratings on tv took and how much more google infiltrates the home than tv ever could...
Why ain't the answer just charge everyone for bandwidth? |
|
xsiddalx
join:2005-03-11
Chicago, IL
·AT&T Yahoo
| reply to SinNombre
Never arbitrary.
Generally:
a) The ISPs violate peering agreements (costs money)
b) The ISPs have to purchase more bandwidth (costs money)
c) The ISPs are concerned with lawsuits (costs money)
d) The ISPs have other more nefarious reasons (they are selling voice services, video services, streaming music services)
In the case of d) once they can identify a way to get a cut of the profits of the providers of such services, a b and c will come back into play in descending precedence (IMO).
Long term...think of the Internet as cable TV...it's gonna suck, except for the people that aren't paying extra to talk with fluff! (think usenet/irc vs broadband reports pay to post) |
|
