supergirl
join:2007-03-20
Pensacola, FL
 ·Cox VOIP
·Skype
 ·Cox HSI
 ·AT&T Southeast
·magicjack.com
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: COMCRAP
said by TKJunkMail  :said by LiberalKing :WILL ALWAYS BE COMCRAP and if cablevision fOllows this fraud ILL SUE THEM Sue away. You will just be throwing your money down a rat hole. You have no chance of winning. Agreed. Stupid to sue over your lack of being able to download illegal stuff. 
--
Saving the world keeps me busy. However, I find Earth very primitive from my home planet of Krypton.
-Supergirl |
|
Cheese
Premium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
clubs:
1 edit | Re: COMCRAP
said by deleted post :
she believes bit-torrent = illegal
And if 90 percent of the content wasn't illegal, I don't think Comcast would be doing this, now would they? |
|
Omega
Displaced Ohioan
Premium
join:2002-07-30
Cheyenne, WY
clubs:
·Bresnan Online
 ·Verizon Wireless B..
·Comcast
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to supergirl
said by supergirl :said by TKJunkMail :said by LiberalKing :WILL ALWAYS BE COMCRAP and if cablevision fOllows this fraud ILL SUE THEM Sue away. You will just be throwing your money down a rat hole. You have no chance of winning. Agreed. Stupid to sue over your lack of being able to download illegal stuff. I play World of Warcraft. Created by a legitimate company (Blizzard), bought and paid for legally. The folks over at Blizzard have determined that the best way to distribute updates for the game is via a client that uses the same protocol as bittorrent.
So, if I was to have comcast, you are pretty much saying they have every right to block the needed data in order for me to play the game.
Just because it CAN be used for something illegal doesn't give them the right to block the protocol entirely. If that was the case then we wouldn't have Xerox machines, CD/DVD burners, VCR's, the list can go on and on.
Plus allowing companies to block stuff like this could set a dangerous precedent. What if Comcast suddenly decides that DSLR should be blocked because they have negative articles about the company? |
|
Cheese
Premium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
clubs:
| said by Omega :I play World of Warcraft. Created by a legitimate company (Blizzard), bought and paid for legally. The folks over at Blizzard have determined that the best way to distribute updates for the game is via a client that uses the same protocol as bittorrent. So, if I was to have comcast, you are pretty much saying they have every right to block the needed data in order for me to play the game. Just because it CAN be used for something illegal doesn't give them the right to block the protocol entirely. If that was the case then we wouldn't have Xerox machines, CD/DVD burners, VCR's, the list can go on and on. Plus allowing companies to block stuff like this could set a dangerous precedent. What if Comcast suddenly decides that DSLR should be blocked because they have negative articles about the company? They aren't "blocking" you from getting the file from what I am reading, once it's done and you start sending is when this is happening. |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
| reply to Omega
said by Omega :Plus allowing companies to block stuff like this could set a dangerous precedent. What if Comcast suddenly decides that DSLR should be blocked because they have negative articles about the company? [sarcasm]
Corporations can do whatever they want... You don't mean crap and you are subservient to the desires, wishes and profit motives of those companies and to believe otherwise is un-American. So bend over and take it like a good American.
[/sarcasm]
Okay, I don't believe that, but that is the basis of the arguments in favor of this type of activity by Comcast.
And quit giving upper management ideas... 
--
Prove it...
Save the Internet Time (NTP) service, use the pool. |
|
tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
·Comcast
| reply to Omega
said by Omega :I play World of Warcraft. Created by a legitimate company (Blizzard), bought and paid for legally. The folks over at Blizzard have determined that the best way to distribute updates for the game is via a client that uses the same protocol as bittorrent. Best?
Or cheapest (for blizzard)? Rather than Blizzard have a large number of high capacity servers, and paying for high capacity connection at peak bandwidth rates, they seed a few hundred/thousand torrents a spread the cost and bandwidth demand to others.
even if comcast is blocking torrents specifically (so far un-PROVEN) I would doubt they know or care about the legality of the content, merely that it is interfering with the operation of their network. |
|
Done_Posting
Shoot to kill
Premium
join:2003-08-22
Toledo, OH
·buckeye cable
| reply to Cheese
The Sandvine product is meant to block seeding (uploading after finishing a downloaded torrent), but in reality they also are rate limiting the download side of things too. They may be using a bucket method of rate limiting, or they may simply limit the number of possible connections to something relatively low, like 50 or 100 concurrent connections per modem. That would in effect slow your torrent download because you're unable receive as many pieces of a torrent at a time.
World of Warcraft is an excellent example of a legitimate use of P2P technology. Blizzard doesn't want to have to pay for bandwidth, so instead of hosting their own files in massive data centers (as some might argue that they should), they rely on ISP's to carry bare the burden of their game file transfers. Definitely a win-win scenario for Blizzard, not so much for the ISP's.
- Tate
--
Happiness is an OC-48 in your basement... |
|
Done_Posting
Shoot to kill
Premium
join:2003-08-22
Toledo, OH
·buckeye cable
| reply to tshirt
said by tshirt :Best? Or cheapest (for blizzard)? Rather than Blizzard have a large number of high capacity servers, and paying for high capacity connection at peak bandwidth rates, they seed a few hundred/thousand torrents a spread the cost and bandwidth demand to others. even if comcast is blocking torrents specifically (so far un- PROVEN) I would doubt they know or care about the legality of the content, merely that it is interfering with the operation of their network. You beat me to it (see above) -- you hit the nail right on the head. Good post, especially the part about the ISP not caring about the legality of the files being transferred. Your ISP cannot be held liable for what you do with their service, as long as it's not hosted on their servers. Their only interest is in keeping the network unsaturated.
- Tate
--
Happiness is an OC-48 in your basement... |
|
Noah Vail
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA | reply to Cheese
Sure they would.
Separate Justification from Reason and you'll see why.
NV |
|
b10010011
Whats a Posting tag?
join:2004-09-07
Bellingham, WA
·Comcast Formerly ..
4 edits | reply to Cheese
Re: COMCRAP
said by Cheese :said by Omega :I play World of Warcraft. Created by a legitimate company (Blizzard), bought and paid for legally. The folks over at Blizzard have determined that the best way to distribute updates for the game is via a client that uses the same protocol as bittorrent. So, if I was to have comcast, you are pretty much saying they have every right to block the needed data in order for me to play the game. They aren't "blocking" you from getting the file from what I am reading, once it's done and you start sending is when this is happening. When you upddate WOW through the client it uses bit torrent protocol.
Now here is the problem, if you watch the download will get to 99% and stay there a while. This is because you are required to SHARE a certain amount of the update (That means sending data) before you are allowed to get to 100% complete and continue.
If they block you from sending then they are also blocking you from receiving the update.
Gaming on Comcast is Comcraptic, I had better ping times to game servers ten years ago on dial-up. |
|
PolarBear
The bear formerly known as aaron8301
Premium
join:2005-01-03
·CableOne
| reply to Cheese
said by Cheese :They aren't "blocking" you from getting the file from what I am reading, once it's done and you start sending is when this is happening. But that is how BT works. If nobody is allowed to seed, nobody can download, either. That is why it is called file sharing. |
|
tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
·Comcast
| reply to Done_Posting
said by Done_Posting :The Sandvine product is meant to block seeding (uploading after finishing a downloaded torrent), but in reality they also are rate limiting the download side of things too. They may be using a bucket method of rate limiting, or they may simply limit the number of possible connections to something relatively low, like 50 or 100 concurrent connections per modem. That speaks to aspect of the other problem.
from a network management view even if available bandwidth is far less limited as with fiber, a client that persistantly attempt to make dozens to hundreds of connection across multiple ports, looks a lot like worm or DoS activity, something that ISP's have an obligation (morally, if not legally) to block/restrict. |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
1 edit | reply to Cheese
said by Cheese :said by deletedpost :
she believes bit-torrent = illegal
And if 90 percent of the content wasn't illegal, I don't think Comcast would be doing this, now would they? Let's see...
2/3rds to 3/4ths of Internet traffic is P2P. All P2P protocols use the TCP/IP protocol to transfer files.
Therefore, by your reasoning, it's okay if Comcast bans the TCP/IP protocol since most of what is carried on it is illegal.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon USA
Are you affected by Comcast's RST forging? How to test it! -or- Read my original report. |
|
Morac
join:2001-08-30
Riverside, NJ
·Comcast
| reply to b10010011
said by b10010011 :Now here is the problem, if you watch the download will get to 99% and stay there a while. This is because you are required to SHARE a certain amount of the update (That means sending data) before you are allowed to get to 100% complete and continue.. That isn't true, I've downloaded 100% without uploading a single byte. It happened recently so I'm guessing it was caused by the upload blocking.
That said if Comcast users are blocked from uploading then the amount of seeders drops dramatically (since Comcast is the largest ISP in the U.S.). If the number of seeders drops too low, then downloading will be very, very slow.
--
The Comcast Disney Avatar has been retired. |
|
grandpinaple
join:2006-01-03
New York, NY
| reply to Cheese
Re: COMCRAP
It is not whether it is legal or illegal they are doing this because they don't like bittorent since it strains their network. Pirating encourages people to get HSI so why would Comcast want to filter it. Comcast just realized that with bitorrent the law of diminishing returns comes into play. |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
| reply to tshirt
said by tshirt :even if comcast is blocking torrents specifically (so far un- PROVEN) I would doubt they know or care about the legality of the content, merely that it is interfering with the operation of their network. The statement that Bittorrent is "interfering with the operation of their network" is also an "un-PROVEN" statement...
--
Prove it...
Save the Internet Time (NTP) service, use the pool. |
|
tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
·Comcast
1 edit | reply to bmn
Re: COMCRAP
said by bmn :said by tshirt :even if comcast is blocking torrents specifically (so far un- PROVEN) I would doubt they know or care about the legality of the content, merely that it is interfering with the operation of their network. The statement that Bittorrent is "interfering with the operation of their network" is also an "un- PROVEN" statement... Notice the if (I'm not yet convinced it is happening) In fact I am convinced that ComCast would only choose to do this, if in fact it was interfering with network operations or under legal duress (which I am sure we would have heard about by now.)
The third Problem large numbers of torrents could cause for network operations is the sheer number of connections.
Let's say 2 of CC's 12 million HSI customers are running BT or similar with an average of 50 connections, that's 100 million connections above the normal/expected traffic hitting CC's routers, DNS, CRAN, etc.
If you have been reading the boards here for even a couple years, you might have read about the rapidly rising route congestion, CC routers dropping packets, DNS failing to respond, etc.,etc.
Just like some basic home routers become overwhelmed by excessive connections, so do their big brothers at CC given enough traffic.
|
|
