Search:  

 
 
   News
newer
story category The EFF 'Test Your ISP' Project
Group takes aim at Comcast, RST packet forgery
(old news - 01:53PM Wednesday Nov 28 2007)
tags: business · hardware · bandwidth · cable · networking · net-neutrality · consumers · Comcast · Cox HSI
Tipped by funchords See Profile
It was recently discovered that Comcast was using forged TCP/IP packets to throttle upstream p2p bandwidth. While the Associated Press got credit for the discovery, it was actually one of our forum users that first uncovered the practice. In fact, site user Robb Topolski had already discovered how to thwart the system months before it even hit the AP's radar. Earlier this month, we had him confirm that Cox was doing something similar.

The Associated Press report ignited an Internet firestorm, and today the Electronic Frontier Foundation is adding fuel to the fire. The outfit has released a series of reports on Comcast's traffic shaping, as well as a guide allowing ISP users to test for packet forgery or other forms of traffic interference by their ISPs.

"Comcast is discriminating among different kinds of Internet traffic based on the protocols being used by its customers," says EFF Senior Intellectual Property Attorney Fred von Lohmann. "When confronted, Comcast has been evasive and misleading in its responses, so we decided to start gathering the facts ourselves." Those facts are compiled in this report, and the EFF cites Topolski's May findings from our forums.

Click for full size
Comcast has argued that the practice falls under the realm of "reasonable network management." This language is important, because while there is no law outlawing such activity, the FCC does have a policy statement (pdf) that insists consumers are "entitled to run applications and services of their choice." That is, unless an ISP is restricting access to protect their network from harm.

The EFF however does not buy Comcast's justification:
It is true that some broadband users send and receive a lot more traffic than others, and that interfering with their traffic can reduce congestion for an ISP. This does not imply that protocol-specific packet forgery is a necessary or legitimate means of responding to the congestion; there are more reasonable mechanisms available to ISPs to ensure that low-volume users are not crowded out by high-volume users.
They say that the packet forgery does not discriminate between high consumption users and regular use:
we saw no evidence that Comcast was targeting their jamming efforts at customers based on their individual consumption of bandwidth. For example, an attempt to seed a 500KB file to a single BitTorrent downloader, instigated after the seeding Internet connection had been idle for the preceding day, triggered the injection of forged RST packets. The pattern of interference by Comcast was exactly the same after the user had uploaded 500MB or so of data over the following day.
Click for full size
In other words, Comcast cannot hide behind the excuse of reasonable network management because the forging of packets is not reasonable, and the practice does little to reel in high-consumption users specifically. The EFF argues that Comcast "did not exhaust the reasonable, user-friendly, and standards-compliant responses before they began taking decidedly less reasonable measures."

As our recent Cox report shows, Comcast is not alone in the use of forged RST packets as a heavy handed solution to network congestion. To get a better handle on how many ISPs are engaged in these kind of practices, the EFF has offered this guide that walks users through the use of Wireshark to help test for protocol discrimination (note: networking knowledge required).

"If ISPs won't give their customers accurate information about their Internet traffic controls, we have to detect and document them for ourselves," says EFF Staff Technologist Seth Schoen.

Related:
  1. Comcast Unfazed By Traffic Shaping Media Heat
  2. NY Attorney General Investigating Comcast
  3. New Buzz Phrase: 'Protocol Agnostic'
  4. Comcast Gets Investigated While Cox Gets Free Pass
  5. What's Behind Comcast's Sudden Love of P2P
  6. Comcast To Deploy Femtocells
  7. Comcast, Cox, Trot Out Their Worst 'Bandwidth Hogs'
  8. Friday Morning Links
Forums » The EFF 'Test Your ISP' Project
view: topics flat text 
Post a:

INeedMoreUpload

@cuny.edu

Interesting...

I'm happy someone in our forums beat the big boys to it. But, what does this hold for the future?
lcnoble

join:2006-11-11
Nancy, KY
·Windstream

Re: Interesting...

I am looking for more understanding of this issue. Why do providers stop communication? I.E., does P2P really take up that much more bandwidth, are the networks so overloaded that they are forced to control traffic, any other issues? I do question the over capacity answer while the providers offer higher tiers. If P2P is preferred, why use other protocols? At this point in the conflict, it appears that using P2P is not illegal, so is it legal for the ISPs to block it's use? I.E., a free speech issue might want to use P2P to get a message to more users, probably cheaper and faster, not much different than campaign laws. If capacity is not an issue, why not use P2P as opposed to other protocols, especially given it's popularity? Encryption is thought of as a cure to packet spoofing, but I would think that encryption adds to the size of the packet. I assume that the issues with the EFF are part of this thread and would like to remind everyone that they are also fighting possible domestic spying justified by non-existent WMDs, among other things! Did I just step in something or what?

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest

Re: Interesting...

said by lcnoble See Profile :

I am looking for more understanding of this issue. Why do providers stop communication?
For... Money. They want to sell you on a high speed, premium package... but then not actually deliver it. They want people to pay $50 a month for premium speeds, but use no more then someone on the budget plan.

It's all about profit, not service.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!)
SilverSurfer

join:2007-08-19

EFF Protects the Consumer's Interests

Yet another case that demonstrates the EFF is the only thing standing between Internet censorship/throttling/blocking by the corporately consolidated providers and the consumer. If not for EFF, the entire Internet in the Western Hemisphere would be controlled by AT*T and Verizon.

JasonD

@comcast.net


from:
TK Junk Mail See Profile

Re: EFF Protects the Consumer's Interests

Surely you jest. Bittorent is the scourge of the internet and should be stopped, Comcast is doing it way too politely. As for the EFF, well their focus should be on where it would matter most for consumers. Instead of frivolous suits and claims against corporate entities (which is bad for business and raises prices for consumers) they should be investigating and going after phishers, scammers, spammers, and online pirates.

Mashimaro
Problematic

join:2003-09-25
Alexander City, AL

Re: EFF Protects the Consumer's Interests

Says the anonymous Comcast employee.

en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
·DSL EXTREME


edit:
November 28th, @02:31PM

Re: EFF Protects the Consumer's Interests

Yup... I suspect it as well.

CableCo/Telco will raise bandwidth rates IF there's low usage.
Eg. 20Mbps connection isn't an issue if there's low usage.

This works similar to an old fashioned Telco CO, where there's a fixed capacity for lets say 40% at any one time (i.e. 40% of the phones can be calling at the same time).
Typical Internet usage (browsing, video clips,downloads) support this model

Bittorrent is a chatty protocol, and many would see this as excess traffic, or consider it as 'running servers', in a method to deter the usage of p2p/Bittorrent. An old telco equivalent would think of this as having multiple people connecting to a local # and leaving the 2 connections open. Get enough of this, and capacity issues arise.

I don't justify it... if they can't support 20Mbps, then don't offer it. Offering it, then packet shaping / filtering / throttling apps at their discression is not the answer.
Why not do it the old / AOL style:
5Mbps 'Internet' (unrestricted) = $60
20Mbps 'proxied/filtered/restricted Internet want to be' $45

This will solve this issue. Sell the Internet as the what it is. Sell a proxied/ad filled/content pushed/cookie based/data mined AOL wannabe as an alternative.
--
Canada = Hollywood North

Zaber
When all are gone, there shall be none

join:2000-06-08
Cleveland, OH
clubs:
·Expedient
·XO COMMUNICATIONS
·AT&T Midwest

said by JasonD :

...Bittorent is the scourge of the internet...
Justify your statement.
--
Give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach a man to fish and he will feed himself for a lifetime

Da Geek Kid

join:2003-10-11
Mclean, VA
surely yer full of $#!t...

Comcast should never be in a business that can't handle the load. We all know they cannot handle that much traffic per customer...

ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
clubs:
·ViaTalk
·AT&T DSL Service

said by JasonD :

Surely you jest. Bittorent is the scourge of the internet and should be stopped, Comcast is doing it way too politely. As for the EFF, well their focus should be on where it would matter most for consumers. Instead of frivolous suits and claims against corporate entities (which is bad for business and raises prices for consumers) they should be investigating and going after phishers, scammers, spammers, and online pirates.
Wow, it looks like the Comcast shills are at the party already!
I would tend to think that the EFF is going after scammers as Comcast is trying to scam their customers under the guise of "network management".
--
"A religious war is like children fighting over who has the strongest imaginary friend."

Have you been touched by his noodly appendage? »www.venganza.org
gateguy
Premium
join:2001-02-12
Reisterstown, MD
I use the Bittorent client built into World of Warcraft to send and receive patches. That is the only time I use any sort of P2P software (that I am aware of).

Does that make me part of the scourge?

morbo
Complete Your Transaction

join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs:

edit:
November 28th, @02:49PM

Re: EFF Protects the Consumer's Interests

yes.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest

said by gateguy See Profile :

Does that make me part of the scourge?
Yes. AND you worship Satan!
bi0tech

join:2003-06-19
I often wonder how many of these type statements on a variety of subjects are true shills, overzealous non-sanctioned employee opinion, or just true believers of nonsense on their own accord.

JasonD care to fill us in?

ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
clubs:
·ViaTalk
·AT&T DSL Service

Re: EFF Protects the Consumer's Interests

said by bi0tech See Profile :

I often wonder how many of these type statements on a variety of subjects are true shills, overzealous non-sanctioned employee opinion, or just true believers of nonsense on their own accord.

JasonD care to fill us in?
I bet you it will be the "true beleiver" category from him.

gaforces
United We Stand, Divided We Fall

join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA

Re: EFF Protects the Consumer's Interests

You got to wait till business hours so he can clock in first.
openbox9

join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL
·AT&T Southeast
·Mediacom

How exactly has the EFF done this great miracle? The EFF is a mouthpiece that occasionally has valid arguments of concern for the Internet populace, but I fail to see how they've been a savior for the Western Hemisphere. BTW, what percentage of the market does AT&T and Verizon own?
SilverSurfer

join:2007-08-19

Re: EFF Protects the Consumer's Interests

said by openbox9 See Profile :

How exactly has the EFF done this great miracle?
You can familiarize yourself by starting here. There are a number of factual, actual, quantifiable, qualitative case histories sufficient to get you started.

said by openbox9 See Profile :

The EFF is a mouthpiece that occasionally has valid arguments of concern for the Internet populace, but I fail to see how they've been a savior for the Western Hemisphere.
Your conjecture and opinion.

said by openbox9 See Profile :

BTW, what percentage of the market does AT&T and Verizon own?
Irrelevant in the face of the simple fact that the telcos have been vying for role of gatekeeper since the Net's inception.
openbox9

join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL

Re: EFF Protects the Consumer's Interests

Failure to explain the saving of the Western Hemisphere is not my conjecture or opinion. I'm not sure what you mean by gatekeeper.

TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
The EFF is nothing but a mouthpiece for music and movie thieves.

RangerTX
Premium
join:2006-05-17
Los Angeles, CA

Re: EFF Protects the Consumer's Interests

said by TK Junk Mail See Profile :

The EFF is nothing but a mouthpiece for music and movie thieves.
Is that an offical or unoffical position by comcast, just asking for clarification.

Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
Albany, NY

Because, of course, a user like gateguy trying to use World of Warcraft's built-in BitTorrent client to pull down a patch or a Linux user using BitTorrent to get a new ISO are such thieves!

It's one thing if they blocked BitTorrent to someone who downloaded 20GB of data in the past week and admit to it. It's quite another to just block BitTorrent entirely while denying that any such blocking it occurring.
jester121

join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
·ViaTalk

said by TK Junk Mail See Profile :

The EFF is nothing but a mouthpiece for music and movie thieves.
They're actually becoming the tech world's equivalent of the ACLU -- and that's not a compliment.
SilverSurfer

join:2007-08-19


edit:
November 28th, @04:53PM

Re: EFF Protects the Consumer's Interests

said by jester121 See Profile :

[They're actually becoming the tech world's equivalent of the ACLU -- and that's not a compliment.
Unless, of course, comes an event and/or time that you, personally need the EFF on your side (as in a DMCA matter), then you will be singing an entirely different tune, I suspect. And that's not a compliment, either.
jester121

join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
·ViaTalk

Re: EFF Protects the Consumer's Interests

said by SilverSurfer See Profile :

said by jester121 See Profile :

[They're actually becoming the tech world's equivalent of the ACLU -- and that's not a compliment.
Unless, of course, comes an event and/or time that you, personally need the EFF on your side (as in a DMCA matter), then you will be singing an entirely different tune, I suspect. And that's not a compliment, either.
Sure, since I certainly shouldn't be held responsible for my actions if I break the law. If I choose to violate the DMCA I'll be sure to pay for my own lawyer, or defend myself.

But isn't it interesting that the EFF and ACLU type organizations are only interested in helping people whose plight or position is closely aligned with their own politics? How very magnanimous of them.

(I realize you're parroting my statement, but I don't think anything you said could be mistaken as a compliment. Nice try at sarcasm, though...)

snorpus

join:2000-10-02
Export, PA

Re: EFF Protects the Consumer's Interests

said by SilverSurfer See Profile :

But isn't it interesting that the EFF and ACLU type organizations are only interested in helping people whose plight or position is closely aligned with their own politics?
Uh, not quite. One of the most famous instances of ACLU involvement was in supporting the right of white supremacists to demonstrate in a largely Jewish suburb of Chicago.

Tzale
Ron Paul - No Bailout Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
NJ, USA
·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online

Re: EFF Protects the Consumer's Interests

said by snorpus See Profile :

said by SilverSurfer See Profile :

But isn't it interesting that the EFF and ACLU type organizations are only interested in helping people whose plight or position is closely aligned with their own politics?
Uh, not quite. One of the most famous instances of ACLU involvement was in supporting the right of white supremacists to demonstrate in a largely Jewish suburb of Chicago.
That is their politics... They're in the politics of following the Constitution to the 'T'.... Some people have a problem with this, so they call them liberals.... Sometimes they defend far right issues and that is used as an example that they are not a "liberal" organization. The truth is that they theoretically are independent... It just happens that the Republicans are infringing on our rights nowadays and therefore it makes the ACLU look liberal. I'm an independent an I support a Republican for president. Don't bother flaming me, I'm not a liberal.

-Tzale

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest

said by snorpus See Profile :

Uh, not quite. One of the most famous instances of ACLU involvement was in supporting the right of white supremacists to demonstrate in a largely Jewish suburb of Chicago.
Please, don't confuse them with the facts!
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!)
SilverSurfer

join:2007-08-19

said by jester121 See Profile :

Sure, since I certainly shouldn't be held responsible for my actions if I break the law.
No idea what that means - Are you saying that anyone who employs the help of the EFF should go directly to prison without due process, including the services of an attorney?

said by jester121 See Profile :

But isn't it interesting that the EFF and ACLU type organizations are only interested in helping people whose plight or position is closely aligned with their own politics? How very magnanimous of them.
As evidenced by the many instances of having represented Skinheads/NeoNazis, the ACLU represents civil liberties, period. Politics doesn't even come into play.

said by jester121 See Profile :

(I realize you're parroting my statement, but I don't think anything you said could be mistaken as a compliment. Nice try at sarcasm, though...)
As to sarcasm, if I wanted to hit you with any kind of wry wit, I wouldn't use your words to do it.
jester121

join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
·ViaTalk

Re: EFF Protects the Consumer's Interests

said by SilverSurfer See Profile :

said by jester121 See Profile :

But isn't it interesting that the EFF and ACLU type organizations are only interested in helping people whose plight or position is closely aligned with their own politics? How very magnanimous of them.
As evidenced by the many instances of having represented Skinheads/NeoNazis, the ACLU represents civil liberties, period. Politics doesn't even come into play.
You're right -- just think of all the dozens of times the ACLU has come to the aid of anti-abortion activitists, Republicans whose privacy was ignored by the Clintons, and on and on. To say nothing of the fact that it was founded by a dedicated group of communists.

:end sarcasm

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest

Re: EFF Protects the Consumer's Interests

said by jester121 See Profile :

Republicans whose privacy was ignored by the Clintons, and on and on.
Amazing how reality can get flipped completely. Swap the positions of the words "Republicans" and "Clintons" and you have ACTUAL REALITY.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!)

clrankin
Premium
join:2002-03-05
Purcellville, VA

Re: EFF Protects the Consumer's Interests

said by KrK See Profile :

said by jester121 See Profile :

Republicans whose privacy was ignored by the Clintons, and on and on.
Amazing how reality can get flipped completely. Swap the positions of the words "Republicans" and "Clintons" and you have ACTUAL REALITY.
Yep. It wouldn't have anything to do with President Can't-Keep-It-In-His-Pants getting a BJ on company time on company property with a company employee, would it?

If anyone at my company tried the crap he pulled-- sexual impropriety and then BREAKING THE LAW by lying under oath about it-- they would be fired post haste. And their crime certainly wouldn't go unpunished either.

But then again most people I know are smart enough to not associate themselves with people like the Clintons-- for the same reason why you wouldn't want to put on your Sunday best and then go play in the mud with a bunch of pigs... you just don't want to get that dirty...
--
Some terrorists don't wear rags on their head, go without showers for weeks, and smell like camel crap. Instead they live in America and support Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for president.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest

Re: EFF Protects the Consumer's Interests

Yeah, nice twist there to try and make a bad analogy fit.

Company time, company employee, etc etc LOL

I'm betting if we had an unlimited budget and 10 years or so to conduct a witch-hunt on you something could be found to screw up your life with.

It's just a matter of prospective, really.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!)

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest

said by jester121 See Profile :

You're right -- just think of all the dozens of times the ACLU has come to the aid of anti-abortion activitists,
Uh.... Ok, prepare to get pwned....

The Iowa Civil Liberties Union (2005) defended the rights of two teenage girls who, for religious reasons, sought to wear anti-abortion t-shirts to school after school officials threatened to punish them.

The ACLU of Ohio (2002) filed a brief in support of preacher who wanted to protest abortion at a parade, but was prohibited from doing so in an Akron suburb.

1999: The ACLU of Maryland assists the March for Life Committee in getting a permit for an anti-abortion march in Annapolis without having to pay a $5,400 fee the city was seeking. The ACLU worked with the American Center for Law & Justice to revise a proposed city ordinance so as to keep free speech free.

1997: Arizona Civil Liberties Union sues City of Phoenix to challenge an ordinance under which the City refused to allow the Children of the Rosary, an anti-abortion group, to place ads on City buses. The lawsuit was filed jointly with the American Center for Law and Justice.

1994: ACLU of Pennsylvania assisted a pregnant 17-year-old whose parents wanted her to have an abortion she didn't want. She had moved away from home to continue her pregnancy, but her parents called police to have her brought home. ACLU convinced officials to let her continue her pregnancy and live away from parents.

1993: ACLU of New Jersey files an amicus brief on behalf of anti-abortion picketers. "Our defense of freedom of speech clearly cannot vary, and has not varied, with the views expressed." -- ACLU attorney Frank Corrado.

1993: ACLU of Florida offers legal assistance to Operation Rescue, who refused the offer.

1992: ACLU of Rhode Island files a friend-of-the-court brief challenging a state judge's increase of bail for anti-abortion defendants, charged with obstructing a clinic, who refused to provide their Social Security numbers.

1991: ACLU of Northern California offers support for man arrested for displaying photographs of human fetuses.

1990: ACLU of Southern California files a brief supporting Operation Rescue's appeal of a federal judge's ruling upholding the use of "pain compliance" techniques by L.A. police.

1990: ACLU of Rhode Island files a friend-of-the-court brief in state Supreme Court in support of anti-abortion protesters challenging the constitutionality of a town ordinance limiting residential picketing.

ETC ETC ETC

Amazing how blasted the ACLU is by people--- who don't even know a damn thing about it except believe it when they hear someone call it a "Liberal-pinko-commie outfit"...

Owned.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!)

Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
Albany, NY

said by jester121 See Profile :

Sure, since I certainly shouldn't be held responsible for my actions if I break the law. If I choose to violate the DMCA I'll be sure to pay for my own lawyer, or defend myself.
Would you be willing to pay for your own lawyer to defend yourself if a big company was using the DMCA to silence you from posting something negative about them online? Even if that negative thing was true and didn't violate the DMCA? Paying for a lawyer is expensive and many people wouldn't be able to afford to defend themselves. There are some companies out there that realize this and try to use the DMCA (and other laws) as the basis for SLAPP lawsuits knowing that the average person will have no choice but to fold.
nasadude

join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD

Re: EFF Protects the Consumer's Interests

that's OK, jester21 sounds like a republican so that means he has lots of money. shoot, he probably keeps an attorney on retainer to sue people that piss him off.
nasadude

join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast

said by TK Junk Mail See Profile :

The EFF is nothing but a mouthpiece for music and movie thieves.
don't hold back TCH, er I mean HCT, tell us how your company, er I mean you, really feel.

oh, by the way, the RIAA and MPAA are nothing but mouthpieces for rapacious, clueless, "megacorps".

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest

said by TK Junk Mail See Profile :

The EFF is nothing but a mouthpiece for music and movie thieves.
Much as certain users on these forums seem to be nothing but mouthpieces for corporate douchebaggery.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
I agree. The EFF kicks ass. They fight for freedom.

gatorkram
Spelling and Grammer impared
Premium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
clubs:
·Suddenlink
·Cirtex Hosting

My ISP does it too...

I have used wireshark a few times to verify that my isp is also sending out the RST packets, blocking unencrypted upstream seeding.

What we need now, is an automated site and script, that people can submit their wireshark logs to, as proof, and to also filter out the normal stuff, and make a public log of the actual fake/forged packets.

It is my understanding, the way this system is working, it not only sends fake packets to people on the isp that is running this sandvine equipment, but it also sends fake packets to the other peers involved.

It seems to me, some of these other victims isps might want to know that forged and abusive packets are being sent to their end users...
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death!
»/testhistory/661871/4f240

See 9 replies to this post

NOCMan
Verizon Fios User
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Flower Mound, TX

Just enable QOS define bittorrent and such as "Bulk"

QOS was designed to deal with these problems and would be very effective if used properly to ensure people are getting the service they expect.

There are devices out there as well that can do deep packet inspection to identify those who would try to circumvent normal port based QOS and mark their packets accordingly.

Comcast is just doing this as a means of saving face where they've oversubscribed areas beyond what they're comfortable in spending on a upgrade.
--
Mac Chatter
»www.macchatter.net

dadkins
Land of Confusion
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
·Comcast

*ANY* user, *ANY* BT traffic

This is bullshit!
No ISP should be doing a blanket protocol kill!

Guy down the street, running wide open 24/7 and every movie/music file known and chewing hundreds of GB? Boot him!
You or I trying to do a little "Distributed Bandwidth"(WoW/software patchs, Linux, LEGAL HD Videos, whatever) and maintain a 1:1 ratio but we get hosed by this nonsense?
Eat me!

While I have basically moved on to better sources for "things", there is the occasional BT use for LEGAL items done here.
My ratio is getting trashed.
Low ratios get you less speed.
Low ratios can get you banned.

Gee! Thanks!
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera

See 16 replies to this post

N O Y B
St. John 3.16

join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast


edit:
November 28th, @02:51PM

ISPs Have Right to Enforce Terms of Service


ISPs have every right to enforce the TOS you have agreed too:
1) by blocking outbound traffic from servers being operated on residential service.
2) by blocking customers who provide their residential service to third parties by hosting and distributing content for them.

So get over it and start abiding by the TOS you have agreed too. Then there will be no issue.


See 46 replies to this post
jericho

join:2001-07-20
Halifax, NS
·Eastlink Cable

Most isp's throttle

unfortunately most isp's in Canada/USA are doing this, it's just we only hear from the big dogs like Comcast and Cox , a lot of the smaller isp's are also doing this it's nothing new. My isp, Eastlink here in Nova Scotia Canada is also throttling the hell out of there so-called 15mbit service. It gets frustrating trying to do just about anything these days with all the packet shaping these isp's are doing. Like one or more have said here, if they cannot allow users to use there advertised speed cause of possible slowdowns on nodes then they really shouldn't be offering the speeds that they offer if there network cannot handle it.

JTRockville
Data Ho
Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
clubs:

Re: Most isp's throttle

Then good on those who don't, like Verizon.

N O Y B
St. John 3.16

join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast


edit:
November 29th, @02:11AM


What most ISPs are doing is enforcing the terms of service their residential customers have agreed to abide by.

1) not to use the service for running/operating/hosting/etc. servers.
2) not to provide the service to third parties.

Some people apparently think it is their bit torrent downloads that are being throttled. But in fact it is the up stream of the person who is hosting and serving that bit torrent content on a residential service that is being throttled.

So download away, but do not blame your ISP for the content providers inability to properly host their content on a business service that permits operation of servers.

mikedalb

join:2003-07-17
Tallahassee, FL

If it's not bittorrent-

what's the next "scourge of the internet"? FTP? IRC? HTTP? When they selectively rst packets because vonage or something else becomes popular, will there be an outcry then?

homenode
Premium
join:2007-11-18
Bullhead City, AZ

It's all about the contract

I think it's really down to contract enforcement.

Most ISPs offer "unrestricted" service to residential users, but preclude the operation of "servers". However, ALL applications that provide a bi-directional data exchange are "servers": email "clients", WEB browsers, FTP clients, games - all these can be classified as "servers" if the definition is used literally. What the ISP is actually saying is a "server" is any service or protocol that can generate more traffic than an "average" customer's internet usage should.

The average ISP contract doesn't usually enumerate the protocols or