dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
New Comcast Throttling System = 'A Really Good DSL Experience'
Welcome to the new age of broadband "transparency"
by Karl Bode 10:44AM Thursday Aug 21 2008
As insiders have informed me, by the end of the year, Comcast is considering implementing a clear 250GB cap, increased DMCA enforcement, and will begin throttling high-consumption users back to "above DSL speeds". Comcast has stated their goal is to make these new network management processes "as transparent as possible," but hasn't specifically said what will trigger the throttling, since they're still testing the system in several markets (Chambersburg, PA, Warrenton, VA, Colorado Springs, CO and East Orange and Lake City, FL). Mitch Bowling, Comcast's senior vice president and general manager of online services, this week did state the throttling will last between 10 and 20 minutes.
quote:
In trials, Comcast has found the fair share system to be effective if the slowing lasts for "roughly between, probably, 10 and 20 minutes," Bowling said. The user's Internet speed would then return to normal. "If they continue that, we would have to manage them again," Bowling said. A user being impeded would have Internet speeds equivalent to "a really good DSL experience," Bowling said.
That's a bit better than, say, HughesNet satellite broadband, which throttles customers back to between 7-14kbps if they cross established daily download limits. HughesNet calls their restrictions a "Fair Access Policy," and Comcast will be calling their system "fair share." Bowling did mention usage-based billing, stating "I think everyone's looked at something," but noting "we haven't made any decisions." It will be interesting to see if consumer advocacy groups prefer the new age of Comcast "transparency," which will come with significant, but very clear, connectivity limitations.


133 comments .. click to read

Recommended comments




ieolus
Support The Clecs

join:2001-06-19
Danbury, CT

2 recommendations

Re: Hmm.. they'll throttle me back to

I can't believe I am saying this, but TK Junk Mail is correct.

While what you state regarding Comcast is true, none of that has anything to do with network neutrality.
--
"Speak for yourself "Chadmaster" - lesopp


funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:6

4 edits

2 recommendations

said by FFH:

And with that statement you become one of those perverting the whole idea of net neutrality from its original meaning - an ISP discriminating against 3rd party companies to give preference to their own products.
If that's true, then I don't care.

A lot of people that don't know much about how the Internet was designed have tried to define Network Neutrality based upon their ideas of who might exploit the Internet and how (such as Yoogle paying an ISP to delay or degrade Gahoo's traffic).

But the root idea that the network neutrality principles are about is preserving the Internet's history of non-discrimination.

said by FFH:

Your definition of net neutrality tries to say an ISP has no right to manage its network at all, except by endlessly expanding capacity to satisfy the needs of the most rapacious users.
For God's sake, Comcast has a right to manage its network. It also has a responsibility to follow the standards and practices that have evolved the Internet to this point.

Managing the network doesn't mean delaying, degrading, or denying access to people who are acting legally and within the confines of their service agreements.

If someone is exceeding their service agreement, then Comcast has a right to manage its network. Shut them off.

If Comcast's technology cannot handle so many users, then Comcast has a right to manage its network. Stop selling subscriptions.

If Comcast is unwilling to upgrade their network as fast as user demands indicate that they should, then Comcast has a right to manage its network. Create lower tiers.

No - what has happened instead is that Comcast has mis-managed its network in order to fudge the perception of the actual bandwidth subscribers have access to in a competition with lower-priced DSL and more-capable FIOS.

Comcast, with 14 million HSI subscribers under it, is trying to create an Internet where there is a penalty for people to use or innovate with high-bandwidth applications. And while there's always been a limit to a subscriber's bandwidth, Comcast is trying to create a second limit.

And while they're conducting this so-called trial of these non-disclosed thresholds, how can innovators on the other side of the globe be expected to test against them?

What kind of trial is this? They haven't disclosed anything useful to people that need to be conducting tests during this trial. The one expectation that they have set -- "it'll be like a very fast DSL line" they can't possibly guarantee based on the prioritization scheme that they've been describing up to this point!

They ought to stop this nonsense now.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...