 keozu
join:2003-02-01
Virgie, KY | voip? what could this do to voip? | |
|
 | 
jjoshua
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Scotch Plains, NJ
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Comcast
| Re: voip? said by keozu  :what could this do to voip? I suspect that it would not be good for audio quality. | |
|
| | |
| | | 
Cjaiceman
Premium,MVM
join:2004-10-12
Aurora, CO
·Comcast Workplace
·Comcast
| Re: voip? said by swhitney2003 :This is actually a concern I didn't think of... I use skype a lot and I really do not want crappy connection because after 15mins I am going to be throttled. Unless your VOIP is using 70% (4.6Mbits/sec)of your connection you won't be throttled. VOIP uses very little data, but the latency is what counts. This is true of listening to music and everything like that.
What the throttling accounts to is if your downloading something larger than about 740MB, then you might be throttled. If your downloading something smaller than that then you won't be using your connection long enough to hit the 15 minute mark. And, on top of that, this will really only impact you when there is congestion on the node, if your node is not horribly oversold you won't see this on your connection. | |
|
| | | | |
| | | battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000 | You might want to come in side so the sky does not hit you on the head when it falls. | |
|
| |
| | 
ztmike
Mark for moderation
Premium
join:2001-08-02
Michigan City, IN
·Comcast
1 edit | Re: Yay karl, another blunder said by baineschile :And BTW, people that use more than 250 gigs a month are piraters anyways, and I am glad to see ISPs getting involved in young males using 80% of their bandwidth so they can download bootleg copies of ironman. You seriously think people use all that bandwidth for illegal ways? There is so much stuff out there that IS LEGAL that will no longer be possible because Comcast can't just keep their current formula and then upgrade their system with D3..that would make to much sense for Comcast.
I guess they would rather get their healthy profits and video walls instead of screwing over their internet users. 
--
ZZPERFORMANCE | |
|
| | | |
| | | | 
pspcrazy
Anime Freak
join:2008-02-06
San Diego, CA
 ·DSL EXTREME
| Re: Yay karl, another blunder Since when did ztmike on his post every mention the word torrent? You seem to think the majority of congestion is caused by torrents lol. The majority of congestion is now caused by video services like netflix, youtube, veoh, itunes, all you can download music services, and streaming sites.
Then again it does seem like you have some stake in comcast as you never give any one anti comcast some slack. | |
|
| | | | | 
imrf
Premium
join:2002-06-06
Utica, MI
·WOW Internet and C..
| Re: Yay karl, another blunder said by pspcrazy : The majority of congestion is now caused by video services like netflix, youtube, veoh, itunes, all you can download music services, and streaming sites. No it isn't. It's been said before the majority of bandwidth consumption is from P2P services. | |
|
| | | | | | lordofwhee
join:2007-10-21
Everett, WA | Re: Yay karl, another blunder A year ago, yes, but in the last few months streaming video has far surpassed torrents as the largest use of bandwidth. | |
|
| | | | | | |
imrf
Premium
join:2002-06-06
Utica, MI | Re: Yay karl, another blunder No it hasn't. | |
|
| | | | | | | | 
digitalfreak
join:2005-12-09
49533 | Re: Yay karl, another blunder TK, is that you? | |
|
| | | 
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| said by ztmike :said by baineschile :And BTW, people that use more than 250 gigs a month are piraters anyways, and I am glad to see ISPs getting involved in young males using 80% of their bandwidth so they can download bootleg copies of ironman. You seriously think people use all that bandwidth for illegal ways? There is so much stuff out there that IS LEGAL that will no longer be possible because Comcast can't just keep their current formula and then upgrade their system with D3..that would make to much sense for Comcast. I guess they would rather get their healthy profits and video walls instead of screwing over their internet users. Please site me how a NORMAL hosuehold would use 250 GB. And pleae don't post shit like using VoiP 24/7 or downloading 50 HD movies a month, because that's not normal usage. | |
|
| | | | hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Toledo, OH
·buckeye cable
| Re: Yay karl, another blunder I would like to know that as well. I live with two college roommates. the cable is in my name and i pay for it so i can the speed and service i want from my cable company.
Myself and one roommate watch videos on CNN and listen to online radio stations from Clear Channel, plus I have Vonage hooked up, the other watches shows online that she missed from earlier in the week from ABC and NBC. We still do windows updates and I send large documents across the country for various projects I volunteer with and does not include any of the class work either of the other two roommates have to upload for their online classes and we never come close to the 250 gig mark of Comcast. | |
|
| | | | 
delusion FTL
@mcleodusa.net
| You do realize that they will throttle you, the light/regular consumer, when you're downloading that 5-6GB game demo or patch or uploading that 1-2GB full SD card of family vacation pictures. You will be treated like the thieving heavy abuser that you are...even if you only use less than 10 GB a month total.
Getting all hung up on 250GB cap only allows you to miss how comcast's lack of network capacity planning and deployment will now affect all users on congested nodes trying to use the bandwidth they pay for even if they are light, bursty sporadic, users. Gone are the days of abusers and pirates being the only ones affected. | |
|
| | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| said by baineschile :Good job Karl, another Comcast lie. Why doont you look at the trend of comcast's stock since the throttling was uncovered... As annoying as I find Karl's biased rants, he statement about stock price was made towards Sandvine, not Comcast. | |
|
| | | 
baineschile
Premium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI | Re: Yay karl, another blunder Suppose it could be read like that, i just had assumed it was another anti-comcast rant | |
|
| | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA | Re: Yay karl, another blunder Well, obviously it is an anti-Comcast rant, but I would expect nothing less from Karl. I still believe he was discussing Sandvine when he mentioned the stock price though. | |
|
| | | | | 
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL
·Comcast
| The new Comcast fee Comcast-"In order to prevent further decline of our stock, we've announced the new 'Comcast Stock Devaluation Recovery Fee'. What this entails is the absolute cessation of all network upgrades, and the implementation of our recession contingency where we cap your Internet usage. Its you the consumer that's at fault. How do you the consumer expect Comcast to oversell our networks if you the consumer actually use them. It's a shame that you the consumer actually thought that we here at Comcast meant 'unlimited'. Any further actions on the part of the consumer may force us to curb your cable tv and VOD use. We thank you for your time....and oh...by the way, our rates will increase 4% in the next quarter!"
--
The "Lifetime" channel is responsible for 83% of all divorces...Robert Ginty | |
|
| | |
| | | Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
| Re: Yay karl, another blunder I would say yes it is right for them to do it. This is simply the most reasonable way to manager their network without them outright disconnecting the users.
If you abuse the network by their standards then your traffic gets a lower priority. That does not mean anything at all you do will be affected, though it could be if your abuse has oversaturated the node. Even then, the effect of this on your internet experience may very well go unnoticed. | |
|
| | |
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| said by JSY :Frankly, I don't give a rats ass what people do with their bandwidth. The real debate should be if it's right for Comcast to do this Um why CAN'T Comcast do it? Which law are they violating? If Comcast isn't legally allowed to have caps then the wireless companies need to get rid of their 5 GB caps. Satelite internet companies need to get rid of thier caps too. | |
|
| | | | |
| | fldiver
Premium
join:1999-12-27
Jacksonville, FL
| Can't you come up with anything new and creative; clearly not because if you stopped and thought for 10 seconds you would realize there are plenty of legitimate ways to use more than 250GB; WHY are there always people like you that always fall back on the RIAA/MPAA rhetoric..?? | |
|
| | | Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO | Re: Yay karl, another blunder There are few legitimate ways to use 250GB a month on a regular basis.
There are even less legitimate ways to have an upload of multiple gigs per month on a regular basis. | |
|
| | | |
Mr Anon
@att.net
| Re: Yay karl, another blunder said by Skippy25 :There are even less legitimate ways to have an upload of multiple gigs per month on a regular basis. Uh, backups? Duh. | |
|
| | |
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| said by fldiver :Can't you come up with anything new and creative; clearly not because if you stopped and thought for 10 seconds you would realize there are plenty of legitimate ways to use more than 250GB Then you should have no problem listing some of them. | |
|
| | gweeper
join:2002-01-04
Southborough, MA
| Legality is irrelevant. BT [and some TCP implementations) are based on greedy algorithms that quite simply fail to scale in the real world of shared-fate infrastructure. Buy dedicated pipes if you want dedicated services, or get your to establish a municipality infrastructure. | |
|
| | thecrisis
join:2006-01-13
1 edit | ROFL are you serious? You obviously don't know how to use the internet if you think you can't use more than 250 GB worth of bandwidth legally.
Bottom line is Comcast is one of the worst ISP's out there. There are much better, faster, and cheaper alternatives. | |
|
| |
delusion FTL
@mcleodusa.net
| Why does my screen name always seem so appropriate?
If you think that because you use less than 250GB or even less than 10GB a month you could not be affected by this throttling policy then you truly are delusional.
READ: You don't have to be a heavy user or pirate to get your paid for internet speeds chopped. | |
|
| |
| 
Cabal
Premium
join:2007-01-21
Boston, MA
| said by keozu :what could this do to voip? Nothing. VoIP uses 64-80 Kbps of data, when not compressed. | |
|
| |
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| Re: voip? said by Cabal :said by keozu :what could this do to voip? Nothing. VoIP uses 64-80 Kbps of data, when not compressed. At 80 Kbps one could use VoIP 24/7 and use only 25 GB a month. Just to make it clear to people how little bandwidth VoIP uses. | |
|
| 
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| said by keozu :what could this do to voip? Limit each call to 14 minutes 59 seconds?
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|
SLD
join:2002-04-17
Los Angeles, CA | Die Die! I was hoping Sandvine would die! | |
|
| 
SuperCPA
Premium
join:2002-11-28
Dayton, OH | Re: Die Die! I was too! Sandvine should die. | |
|
| | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA | Re: Die Die! Why? It isn't Sandvine's equipment or services that hampers your connection to the Internet, it's your service provider's implementation of the equipment. | |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Easy solution... Set your BT to 69% throughput 
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
|
See 7 replies to this post |
|
espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN | .. who cares? They published the technical details about how the system is going to work -- who cares if they are using hardware that they already own that happens to have a Sandvine logo on it? | |
|
|
See 8 replies to this post |
|
|
|
Switeck
@comcast.net
| Re: other cable providers should follow suit ComCast previously described using forged RST packets on BitTorrent traffic as "delaying" it. ComCast's Sandvine hardware is STILL "delaying" BitTorrent traffic. Now ComCast is buying more Sandvine products and switching to a "protocol agnostic" method that during congestion..."the user's traffic being delayed or, in extreme cases, dropped".
If "delayed" still has the same meaning to ComCast, then user-initiated traffic may be hit by forged RST packets...and appear to be canceled by the user's own actions rather than by ComCast!
The wording leaves little doubt that "delayed" will be done more often than "OR in extreme cases dropped".
Given ComCast's recent history, we have NO reason to take any (lies, dammed lies, statistics), benchmarks, press releases, and political promises made by ComCast at face value.
So if everyone's traffic is treated like Bittorrent traffic currently is, it would be "delayed" ALL THE TIME -- even when the local network is not overloaded, even for low-traffic customers, and even when the traffic is legal. | |
|
| hadirtyJlo
join:2004-03-31
Elk Grove, CA
·Comcast
| Haha, you're funny. I do remote and online video production, and I stream live matches, (video games, get your MLB panties unbunched.) I probably average about 180GB of raw footage downloaded a month, and around 60GB of finished footage uploaded a month. Yeah, some of that 60GB are doubles, but when clients want two different file formats, so be it. That right there is 240GB of LEGITIMATE use. Add regular web surfing and video watching, and I'm over 330GB easy. On months I decide to use my newsgroups, I can top out around 450GB, but that's not that often. Just because you only use 25GB/mo on average doesn't mean jack shit, just means you don't use your connection to its fullest. Remember, this throttling would affect a "regular" user too, all it'd take is them downloading a large game patch, or a friends video he made and put up on filefront. | |
|
| | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA | Re: other cable providers should follow suit Sounds like business use to me. | |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
 ·Skype
1 edit | This is good Comcast Corporation, the nation’s leading provider of entertainment, information and communications, has selected Sandvine’s Congestion Management for Fairshare solution. Comcast’s selection of the solution was documented in certain recent filings made by Comcast with the Federal Communications Commission. Terms of the agreement have not yet been finalized but Sandvine anticipates that commercial deployment of the product will commence sometime in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2008. This is another positive development. When a vendor won't disclose their design win, there's a reason. Maybe it's an innocent reason, but maybe it is a nefarious one.
Sandvine wasn't just the Internet's leading manufacturer of "Reset" packets, it also turned out a fairly nice array of products that help enterprises and ISPs with their businesses in ways that do not interfere with anyone's communications.
They probably deserved the bloody nose that they got -- marketing application-discriminatory products to broadly attack certain uses on the Internet regardless of congestion (although Comcast was also responsible for many of those choices). This new one will only affect congestion.
I've expressed my own concerns about certain specifics on the new method, but this announcement is a good, healthy sign that the Internet of the future will be less secretive than the Internet of the past.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
| |
|
| openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: This is good said by funchords :They probably deserved the bloody nose that they got -- marketing application-discriminatory products to broadly attack certain uses on the Internet regardless of congestion (although Comcast was also responsible for many of those choices). I'd suggest that Comcast is fully to blame. You can't blame the manufacturer for the provider's implementation. Reference overused gun manufacturer/reseller responsibility for their product being used in a crime argument. | |
|
yuutomo
The Wonder Kitter
Premium
join:2001-08-27
Missoula, MT | the only... way to make anyone realize and oust the current board at comcast, would be if everyone dropped their service at the same time, and noone signed up. | |
|
jammmin
join:2000-12-14
Upper Marlboro, MD
1 edit | Its simple. Just dump Comcraptic I just dumped Comcast 2 weeks ago and couldn't be happier.
I am now with FIOS and the service is 100% superior. | |
|
| |
| | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Its simple. Just dump Comcraptic said by JTRockville :I found FiOS to be superior to Comcast too - in many ways. Now that Comcast's "scavenger class" is making a splash in the news, it really makes me extra delighted to have Verizon FiOS as my WAN. said by Chris Albrecht :
For broadband providers, imposing bandwidth caps is all the rage, with Comcast leading the charge. On the opposite end of the spectrum is Verizon, which has now gone on the record to say that they won't be implementing bandwidth caps any time soon.
...
»newteevee.com/2008/09/23/verizon···ndwidth/
Person at door: KNOCK KNOCK
JTRockville: Who's there?
Person at door: Brian
JTRockville: Brian who?
Person at door: Brian Roberts here to disconnect your FIOS and bring you back to Comcast.
| |
|
| | | 
JTRockville
Data Ho
Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
clubs: | Re: Its simple. Just dump Comcraptic NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, omg no!
I suspect Brian would never darken my door anyway. They can pick-n-choose their customers, dontchaknow. | |
|
utahluge
join:2004-10-14
Draper, UT
·Comcast
·MSTAR
1 edit | Above DSL Speeds..... I was thinking....and it probably is just a funny thought....
If I order the -lowest- possible data rates from Comcast and purposefully hit the 250Gig cap, via their tos (or whatever its called), they will have to speed UP my connection. ha ha
DSL does get 20~Mbit..... | |
|
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| So let me just get this straight... ...they disclosed the cap and they're implementing protocol agnostic QOS, not only that but they're only doing it when their equipment is close to capacity, yet the same people who were bitching about BT throttling and invisible caps are still bitching? Who saw that one coming? I sure didn't. | |
|
Redlight
Rarr
join:2001-12-01
Bridgeport, OH
| 70% of allotted capacity So let me get this straight.. If I download at full speed for more than 15 minutes I'm going to be cut down to lower speeds? I am paying for this SPEED not to be downgraded because I'm downloading from Netflix, game demos and stuff that I PAY FOR?
Gimme a break here.. this is going a little too far Comcrap. | |
|
|
See 7 replies to this post |
|
chronoss2009
join:2008-09-23 | MY counter solution give free leech to all comcast users until comcast changes there ways, then we will move to the next ISP and so on and when each netwrok gets pummeled into the ground.
Well you get the idea. | |
|
| openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA | Re: MY counter solution And that helps the situation how? If anything, that justifies Comcast's necessity to actively manage their network. | |
|
chronoss2009
join:2008-09-23
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| 2nd idea YES actually go and redownlaod the same linux iso over and over until your past the limit
have every comcast user do this
play browser games and flash online games all the time and make sure that VOIP is in da house
make sure you have a router that has 8 ports and hook everyone up to it
tell them to go NUTS | |
|
| |
beck
Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-29
On The Road
·Qwest.net
 ·Verizon BroadbandA..
| So... If you use 70% of what you are paying for, you may be cut off. Hmmm... So, is that kind of like using 70% of your full tank of gas and you spin the wheel to see if your car will blow up????
--
Some people are like slinkies - not really good for much.
But they bring a smile to your face when pushed down the stairs. | |
|
| runlevelfour
join:2002-06-12
USA
| Re: So... said by beck :If you use 70% of what you are paying for, you may be cut off. Hmmm... So, is that kind of like using 70% of your full tank of gas and you spin the wheel to see if your car will blow up???? What kind of comparison is that? Comcast is throttling high consumption users, not destroying their equipment and them with it.
Furthermore there is no "chance" to it. I think it is clearly well known how the system works unless you have reading comprehension problems or didn't RTFA to begin with. I don't know if I necessarily agree with the entire setup but I can understand why they are doing it. I definitely don't agree with blanket statements like the one made earlier about how everyone using high amount of bandwidth is automatically a pirate. That is just as inane as the comment I am responding to.
There is only so much capacity to go around and when you have a small minority consuming the lion's share and causing problems for the bulk of the people who pay just as much for the same service then something has to be done. And no, Comcast shouldn't have to shell out extra money to facilitate the high end consumers. I can understand having an argument about what the thresholds are set at, but don't bitch and moan because you're forced to be less of a bandwidth pig.
I would suggest there be a service tier that bypasses the restriction (or at least lessens it) for the people who really want the high speed and transfer rates. I have no problem with people using their access, so long as it doesn't affect other users. | |
|
|
| nocannothave
join:2006-10-14
Kennewick, WA
·Charter Pipeline
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Jason from Comcast I respectfully request you explain how "less than a fraction of 1% of users" can trash everyone else's connection.
This comment is tossed around like a Ceaser salad at DiNicola's Italian restaurant.
(Less than a fraction of 1% is Comcast's own number.) | |
|
GW BUSH
@comcast.net | Capitalist America JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF CAPITALIST AMERICA. | |
|
Noob
@rr.com
| Why throttle at all? Why does comcast feel the need to throttle at all?
It seems to me its just a waste of resources. Making a cap paints a clear enough picture that there are limits to your service. It would be so much easier to just implement a simple three strikes your out rule:
1st offense: You get a nasty email and letter.
2nd offense: You get a nastier email, letter, and phone call.
3rd offense: You are notified that your account will be dropped / suspended (what ever they wanna call it).
Others have already said that it takes a lot for a normal user (singular) to go over 250gb.
I can only see the need for a throttling of ones connection because of the poor planning (lack of user data gathering) by management and/or poor business practices (over selling). | |
|
Comcablrtl
join:2003-10-25
Midwest
·Comcast
| Just switch to Business Class service If you need to use the Internet in a way that will make you exceed your 250 GB cap, switch to Comcast Business Class. It is not covered by the cap, and has a reasonable price. I don't believe the network management system is being applied to Business class customers either. The average customer does not use anywhere near the amount of bandwidth needed to cause any issues. The ones that do should just upgrade to a Comcast service that fits their needs and stop complaining.
As far as caps and usage guidelines go, it's only a matter of time before other companies implement their own similar terms. Don't think that Verizon and the others won't do it. ATT has already hinted at it. For a good example of companies following suit, look at all of the cell phone companies raising their text messaging rates soon after one-another. | |
|
| Oedipus
join:2005-05-09
1 edit | Re: Just switch to Business Class service Nevermind. | |
|
|
NWRMidnight
@comcast.net
| The cap is not the issue, 250 gigs is more then enough.
The problem is the 15 minutes using more then 70%. I tend to download games off steam, sometimes 2 or 3 at a time, along with downloading other things, etc. with today's game sizes, it is easy to be over 70% for 15 minutes.
So, if I do this during peak times, which is when I'm using my connection, I may get busted? I have to change my downloading habits, getting legal material, using the speed I pay for just to keep from getting "slowed down" doing things legally.
It would be the same as me doing the legal speed limit of 70mph and after 15 minutes, my car slows down to 25 mph.. yet, I was doing nothing illegal...
I won't be surprised if we see some lawsuits in the near future. This will be very close, if not equal to fraud. You are purchasing a connection up to the speed your package has.
If they actively keep you from getting the speeds you pay for, which is what this will be, then they will be engaging in fraud. I don't recall any other business that would be allowed to do this to a consumer.
Come on poeple... How can you not see how wrong this is. | |
|
chance360
Premium
join:2008-09-10
Houston, TX |  CoUNTor ATTACK!!!
| |
|
DSLTech
join:2000-12-30
San Jose, CA
| When every other article is about bandwidth or capacity When every other article is about bandwidth or capacity, wouldn't some folks get a clue that there is a real problem here?
Capacity is an issue, and bandwidth hogs are an issue.
I agree with putting "hogs" on special "buses". We should all be happy about this. Perhaps now when you're playing TF2 at 3 PM on Saturday you won't be disturbed by 300 neighbors downloading Superman 9 from the newsgroups or P2P.
Keep in mind there are still going to be a couple dozen very successful, legal streaming media content providers maturing over the next decade, and that will most likely end up being more bandwidth-costly than P2P currently is. The good thing about those services is that in most cases they will stream the content at a controlled rate so as to limit the "damage" on their end of the network. | |
|
|
|
|
Sandvine Fuels New Comcast System
·
other cable providers should follow suit
·