 jester121
join:2003-08-09 Lake Zurich, IL
·surpasshosting
·ViaTalk
| Technically... quote: "This is conclusive proof that Cox is interfering with eDonkey uploads by abusing the RST (abort/reset) flag," he says.
It's evidence that someone/something between the user in the US and the one in Tel Aviv is interfering with traffic.
If you're going to talk like a scientist, then talk like a scientist. | |
|
 |   funchords Hello Premium,MVM join:2001-03-11 Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
1 edit | Re: Technically... said by jester121 :It's evidence that someone/something between the user in the US and the one in Tel Aviv is interfering with traffic. No, because there are numerous other transactions also shown where the same thing happens - from all over the 'net. (See capture details HERE)
Tel Aviv was just the main example that I used in my post to to show the details of what was happening at the protocol level. -- Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon USA Are you affected by Comcast's RST forging? How to test it! -or- Read my original report. | |
|
 amungus Premium join:2004-11-26 America clubs:
| eTree? Hope this doesn't mess up perfectly legal torrents like eTree or archive.org.
Guess we wait and see...
People seem to forget one of the original intents of BT - "tapers" trading LEGAL recordings of concerts... Believe it or not, it's a fairly large community that's still pretty active.
Would really stink if this were disrupted. | |
|
 |  dagman52
join:2007-11-12 32879 | Re: eTree? I don't think it has anything to do with legal vs. illegal, its a method to manage traffic. Whether its a good one is a different story. | |
|
 |  russotto
join:2000-10-05 Collegeville, PA | The RIAA had a law passed making taping of concerts illegal. | |
|
 |  |   MarkyD Premium join:2002-08-20 Oklahoma City, OK clubs:
·Cox HSI
| Re: eTree? said by russotto :The RIAA had a law passed making taping of concerts illegal. I'm not sure that's entirely true. Several bands that are signed to major labels encourage tapers. | |
|
 |  |  amungus Premium join:2004-11-26 America clubs:
| Here's a list I found after a quick search »btat.wagnerone.com/search.php?oneClick=1
If you can't find at least one artist/band that rings a bell, you should get out more (\sarcasm...)
Seriously, it's usually ok by most bands as long as you're not a total jerk. Also depends on venues too, but whatever. | |
|
 |  |
 |  |  openbox9
join:2004-01-26 Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: eTree? said by Sarah :My friend spent about 9 million hours tracking band members down and getting permission and signing waivers to videotape and getting permission for me to upload it, and then Comcast decides it's not allowed. This is about Cox, not Comcast. And your friend is over a thousand years old? | |
|
 |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  openbox9
join:2004-01-26 Alexandria, VA | Re: eTree? Which part, actually getting permission, or the time spent to do so...or both. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |   Sarah Premium,ExMod 2002-05 join:2001-01-09 Cambridge, MA clubs:
| Re: eTree? said by openbox9 :Which part, actually getting permission, or the time spent to do so...or both. 9 million hours = hyperbole. I do not know exactly how many hours he spent getting permission from all parties, but I do know it was a process that took him a couple of months from initial inquiry to actually getting permission to actually filling out all the forms the venue required. And yes, I watched him fill out the forms and I read the waiver he signed, so I know it is 100% on the up and up. He owns a record store and is always careful to get permission for everything so he doesn't piss off any of the labels or bands he works with.
The band was really pleased and thanked him for taking the time to tape and share with the fans, and they posted links to the videos on their site.
Lots of bands like it when their fans tape stuff. They see it as a compliment, and free advertising if it's shared on youtube or bittorrent.
said by TKJunkMail :He can upload to a sever not using P2P apps like bittorent. Bittorrent was invented for things like this, it is not illegal and there is no reason that we shouldn't be able to use it to share legal, homemade amateur videos. Don't all these broadband companies advertise how you can share video and music and pictures? -- Killers and liars welcome | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  openbox9
join:2004-01-26 Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: eTree? said by Sarah :He owns a record store and is always careful to get permission for everything so he doesn't piss off any of the labels or bands he works with. If he's doing this for his record store, he probably shouldn't be using his Comcast residential connection. If he wishes to continue his distribution, there are numerous mechanisms to do so.said by Sarah :Bittorrent was invented for things like this, it is not illegal and there is no reason that we shouldn't be able to use it to share legal, homemade amateur videos. I doubt the ISPs are doing this for legality reasons. They are most likely doing to decrease the burden on their networks.said by Sarah :Don't all these broadband companies advertise how you can share video and music and pictures? I don't know about advertisements for all ISPs, but you can still share video, music, and pictures as advertised. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |   Sarah Premium,ExMod 2002-05 join:2001-01-09 Cambridge, MA clubs:
| Re: eTree? said by openbox9 :If he's doing this for his record store He's not. he probably shouldn't be using his Comcast residential connection He isn't.
I'm not sure how "he owns a record store" and "I have a Comcast connection" turned into "he is recording things for his store and using a Comcast connection"... -- Killers and liars welcome | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  fiberguy My views are my own. Premium join:2005-05-20
| Re: eTree? So why don't you take this up in a thread that is about Comcast and let Cox has a moment in the sun!?
Why not call this website "Rag On Comcast".com?  -- "Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and Im told its a womans prerogative..." | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   Lumberjack Premium join:2003-01-18 Newport News, VA | This one time, on the Internet, I had a friend that did something too. -- »www.fairtax.org | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   Sarah Premium,ExMod 2002-05 join:2001-01-09 Cambridge, MA clubs:
| Re: eTree? said by Lumberjack :This one time, on the Internet, I had a friend that did something too. If you're calling me a liar, why aren't you brave enough to say it?  -- Killers and liars welcome | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  jjeffeory
join:2002-12-04 USA | You just can't share as much video, music, and pictures as you want, riiiight? | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  openbox9
join:2004-01-26 Alexandria, VA | Re: eTree? Sure you can IAW your ISP's ToS and AUP. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  wierdo
join:2001-02-16 Tulsa, OK
·Future Nine Corpor..
·Teliax VOIP
| Re: eTree? As I mentioned in response to some other fool upthread, Cox is interfering with BT seeds on CBS connections, which specifically allow servers. They're not just enforcing TOS.
Given that their "blocking" only kicks in on seeds, I think it's fair to say that what Cox is doing is enforcing their TOS regarding "no servers." | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   funchords Hello Premium,MVM join:2001-03-11 Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
| Re: eTree? said by wierdo :Given that their "blocking" only kicks in on seeds, I think it's fair to say that what Cox is doing is enforcing their TOS regarding "no servers." That would be fair to say, however such a restriction in a "TOS" goes against the FCC policy statement.
quote: FCC Chairman Michael Powell in 2004 announced a new set of non-discrimination principles, which he called the principles of "Network Freedom." In a speech at the Silicon Flatirons Symposium in February 2004, Powell stated that consumers must have the following four freedoms:
1. Freedom to access content. 2. Freedom to run applications. 3. Freedom to attach devices. 4. Freedom to obtain service plan information.[19]
As remarked upon by David Isenberg, Chairman Kevin Martin later modified these four freedoms to read:
1. Consumers are entitled to access the lawful Internet content of their choice; 2. Consumers are entitled to run applications and services of their choice, subject to the needs of law enforcement; 3. Consumers are entitled to connect their choice of legal devices that do not harm the network; and 4. Consumers are entitled to competition among network providers, application and service providers, and content providers.
On August 5, 2005, the FCC adopted a policy statement stating its adherence to these principles.
Federal Communications Commission (2005-08-05). New Principles Preserve and Promote the Open and Interconnected Nature of Public Internet (PDF).
So what trumps what? The TOS or the FCC policy? -- Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon USA Are you affected by Comcast's RST forging? How to test it! -or- Read my original report. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  wierdo
join:2001-02-16 Tulsa, OK
·Future Nine Corpor..
·Teliax VOIP
| Re: eTree? A mere statement of policy of that sort creates no obligation for any ISP to do anything, much less allow servers. Call me when the FCC has an actual rulemaking on the subject. Additionally, these moronic blocking schemes could arguably fall under "reasonable network management," at least insofar as they are used to enforce the ISP's terms of service or prevent BT users from sucking up the vast majority of the limited upstream bandwidth available on most cable systems.
I think it's crappy of them to not allow servers, but that's the way things have been for at least the last 10 years. It's something that we all contractually agreed to when signing up, and something we can all (theoretically; see my above posts) get around by paying them a bit more money each month to subscribe to the service which allows servers.
If anything, Cox is being more permissive than their TOS requires, although that's probably more because applications like WOW use BT to distribute patches than their being nice. Anything that requires the user to serve content is a technical TOS violation.
Of course, in reality, the cable companies should be quite happy for anything that makes them less of a net traffic sink. It's much easier to get peering when you're not sucking vastly more than you spew. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  BrokenZOdiac
join:2005-01-11 Lost
| said by funchords :said by wierdo :Given that their "blocking" only kicks in on seeds, I think it's fair to say that what Cox is doing is enforcing their TOS regarding "no servers." That would be fair to say, however such a restriction in a "TOS" goes against the FCC policy statement. quote: FCC Chairman Michael Powell in 2004 announced a new set of non-discrimination principles, which he called the principles of "Network Freedom." In a speech at the Silicon Flatirons Symposium in February 2004, Powell stated that consumers must have the following four freedoms:
1. Freedom to access content. 2. Freedom to run applications. 3. Freedom to attach devices. 4. Freedom to obtain service plan information.[19]
As remarked upon by David Isenberg, Chairman Kevin Martin later modified these four freedoms to read:
1. Consumers are entitled to access the lawful Internet content of their choice; 2. Consumers are entitled to run applications and services of their choice, subject to the needs of law enforcement; 3. Consumers are entitled to connect their choice of legal devices that do not harm the network; and 4. Consumers are entitled to competition among network providers, application and service providers, and content providers.
On August 5, 2005, the FCC adopted a policy statement stating its adherence to these principles.
Federal Communications Commission (2005-08-05). New Principles Preserve and Promote the Open and Interconnected Nature of Public Internet (PDF).
So what trumps what? The TOS or the FCC policy? Policy is not law TOS is not law
Both are left to interpretation and when an ISP says no servers they mean no servers. You have the option to go elsewhere if you can not abide by reasonable network management. Just because one person decides 40,000 requests for the latest backstreet boys cd rip flooding into his neighborhood isnt affecting his connection too bad his neighbors might not feel the same way and have reason to complain because local network is being assaulted in a way not disimilar to a DDOS attack. | |
|
 |  |  |
 |  PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04 Banks, OR
2 edits | Legal or Illegal doesn't matter
The issue is whether or not P2P violates the TOS for the Service. Is Cox the same as Comcast in prohibiting P2P?
IMHO, you can hardly call it "abuse" when you use the service for something that you agreed you wouldn't use it for when you signed up, and the ISP then disrupts it. Yea, maybe the ISP let it slide for awhile, but it was inevitable that the party would end eventually.
Don't like it? Find a broadband provider that allowed P2P in their TOS, and move to the area they serve. Or convince Congress to prohibit ISP's from placing restrictions such as this in their Service Agreements ('hope you have deep pockets). | |
|
 |  |  jjeffeory
join:2002-12-04 USA
1 edit | Re: Legal or Illegal doesn't matter ... Of course when the TOS changes so often that you can't keep up with it, there's a problem. Isn't it great that companies can change their TOS but users can't. The only change the customer can make is going somewhere else. And the competition is playing the same game. OLIGOPOLY!!! | |
|
 |  |  |  fiberguy My views are my own. Premium join:2005-05-20
| Re: Legal or Illegal doesn't matter ... You also agreed that they would/could change the TOS at anytime... so if they changed it.. you knew it could. Last time I checked, cable doesn't put you in lame and P*ssy contracts like phone does... -- "Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and Im told its a womans prerogative..." | |
|
 |  |  |  |  jjeffeory
join:2002-12-04 USA 2 edits | Re: Legal or Illegal doesn't matter ... I dunno, it's starting to look that way. What good is a contract when one side can change the terms at will... That's an unfair advantage. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |   funchords Hello Premium,MVM join:2001-03-11 Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
| Re: Legal or Illegal doesn't matter ... said by jjeffeory :I dunno, it's starting to look that way. What go is a contract when one side can change the terms at will... That's an unfair advantage. It's a complex problem inherent to service providers of open-ended subscription services: cable TV, ISP, credit cards, mobile phones, ...
Write to your state and federal legislators to get it changed. Meanwhile, there are websites and software programs that will watch a page for you and notify you whenever it changes. -- Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon USA Are you affected by Comcast's RST forging? How to test it! -or- Read my original report. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  jjeffeory
join:2002-12-04 USA
1 edit | Re: Legal or Illegal doesn't matter ... Thanks for the information. There's also the issue of the unconscionability of the TOS for the average consumer in the first place. Joe6 Pack simply doesn't understand what is going on. The language is written in such a way that the average user is at a great disadvantage. On the other end of the TOS, the writer is very sophisticated and knows how they're limiting the user. So if something changes, the user doesn't understand the consequences until there's a problem. | |
|
 |  |  wierdo
join:2001-02-16 Tulsa, OK
·Future Nine Corpor..
·Teliax VOIP
| said by PDXPLT :IMHO, you can hardly call it "abuse" when you use the service for something that you agreed you wouldn't use it for when you signed up, and the ISP then disrupts it. Yea, maybe the ISP let it slide for awhile, but it was inevitable that the party would end eventually. I can call it abuse. They're doing this crap (with BT..I haven't tested eDonkey) to lines purchased from Cox Business, which specifically allow servers.
I can't even seed from my server in San Diego to my home connection in Tulsa. | |
|
 kingofdsl
join:2002-12-11 Afton, OK | How is it abuse when Cox owns the network? This is conclusive proof that Cox is interfering with eDonkey uploads by abusing the RST (abort/reset) flag.
--Robb Topolski ===================================================== How is it abuse when Cox owns the network? | |
|
 |  See 9 replies to this post |
|
 SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
| Tip of the Iceberg Until a law is passed that makes it financially unpleasant for providers to block/throttle/discriminate against certain kinds of traffic on the network, providers will continue to play this game with the users.
The key is that significant numbers of users must bitch en masse sufficient to make it a PR nightmare for those providers who base their advertising claims on "lightning fast" speeds when the reality is closer to lightning fast speeds based on the network traffic that the provider arbitrarily decides it will allow on its network. Nothing less than NN will cure these kind of games. | |
|
 |  See 17 replies to this post |
|
 |
 |  |
 axus
join:2001-06-18 Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
| Bittorrent works very fast for me on Cox I love Cox!
Haha. Anyways, I don't need anything from Bittorrent very often, but when I've used it the transfer has been very fast. It sounds like an eDonkey-only thing, but that makes little sense because it can't be the majority of traffic they get.
My total bandwidth usage is pretty low, even shared between 4 people. I've had the net connection go out a couple times the last week, sort of, a DHCP release and renew would get it going again. | |
|
 |   KrK Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy Premium join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK | Re: Bittorrent works very fast for me on Cox It's coming. They are hosing up BT in several markets already. | |
|
  ztmike Mark for moderation Premium join:2001-08-02 Michigan City, IN
·Comcast
1 edit | Here we go again.. I don't see why people on this site are agreeing with this crap these isp's are pulling..
Notice how Comcast started it all and now other isp's are catching on to the idea..its only going to spread to other isp's and get worse.
Unless someone takes a stand against this crap and stop it before it gets REALLY bad.
**I wonder whats going with the lawsuits Comcast is currently going threw...no updates on them DSLR? -- "I am the worst president in U.S history, I'm either stupid or dumb most of the time, but people still believe me." George W. Bush | |
|
 |  See 17 replies to this post |
|
  gaforces United We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07 Santa Cruz, CA
| Dont block me bro! Sounds like cable companys are testing the waters to make thier flawed networks keep bringing home the bacon ...
Dont block a protocol just because people abuse it, take actions against the abusers, not everyone.
Torrent is a very popular, useful, and valuable technology for millions of people who dont abuse the network. | |
|
 |  See 7 replies to this post |
|
  DaSneaky1D one wall to block them all Premium,MVM join:2001-03-29 The Lou
·Charter Pipeline
| Your doctor solely communicates with you.... Let's say your doctor solely communicates with you via traditional mail. Everyday, you and your doctor send multiple letters to each other, your residential mailbox to his mailbox. Due to the large amount of message exchanges, you encode each letter with a tracking process to verify that each letter is read with the intended response.
One day, the local letter carrier notices how much mail they are now carrying, and in an attempt to lessen his own burden, he decides to toss a few of your coorespondances (figuring it's not really that important considering the amount of letters that are already exchanged), yet continues to get your bills to you.
After you notice that letters are missing, you and your doctor determine that neither are at fault and conclude that the letter carrier is the problem. When he's confronted, he simply says, "your exchanges makes my job harder to get mail to other mail boxes."
Now, the USPS is responsible for delivering mail through its system. If an object is proved to be dangerous to the system, USPS employees, and end users, they take procautions to prevent damage/harm. Is it really up to the letter carrier, though, to determine that your exchanges are such a burden to effectively deliver that they can simply be disregarded...as long as your other "important" letters are unaffected? -- :: my trivial ramblings :: | |
|
 |  See 43 replies to this post |
|
  DotMac4 Shill H8r Premium join:2007-10-26 Huntington Beach, CA
| Why do they (Cox) care? Unlike Comcast or Time Warner, Cox has monthly caps clearly stated in their TOS/AUP in terms of both month upload and download limits. If someone is abusing their service with use exceeding the published caps, send out a nastygram.
Unlike Comcast, Cox can't use the network management argument. Their monthly caps are their network management. | |
|
 |  See 7 replies to this post |
|
 |
 |  jsouth Jsouth
join:2000-12-12 Wichita, KS | Re: Comcast Inviso-Caps! Yes. Cox stated their caps, but they are rarely enforced. -- Bush bashing is old. How about more solutions instead? | |
|
 |  |   dadkins Can you do Blu? Premium,MVM join:2003-09-26 Hercules, CA
·Comcast
| Re: Comcast Inviso-Caps! said by jsouth :Yes. Cox stated their caps, but they are rarely enforced. Like I said, I'll stick with Inviso that cruises in the 200-300 GB range. Remember, *I* rarely hit 30GB per month. But if I ever get the urge... Comcast doesn't enforce any cap, they warn for Network Degradation. No numbers. -- Think outside the Fox... Opera | |
|
 |
 |  |
  Da Geek Kid
join:2003-10-11 Mclean, VA | where's the surprise? Another normal thing Monopolistic companies do... | |
|
 |  See 6 replies to this post |
|
  gatorkram Spelling and Grammer impared Premium join:2002-07-22 Winterville, NC clubs:
·Embarq
·linode
| Who owns the network Why do people keep saying, such and such isp owns the network, and thus they are free and welcome to do anything with it they wish?
Unless I am confused here, why would cox, or comcast, or any other isp have a network, if they didn't have end users paying the bills, and having the desire to use it?
On another point, is it my understanding, the way the protocol is being disrupted, affects not only people on the cox, or comcast network, but is it also affecting people on other networks, because the technology they are using, sends forged packets in both directions. -- Give me bandwidth or give me death! »/testhistory/661871/4f240 | |
|
  dallash Premium join:2001-08-17 Little Rock, AR clubs: | Hooray for Cox.. Go get 'em. Preserve the network for people who don't have a "something for nothing" mentality. | |
|
 |   CCNnorthcali
join:2004-03-07 Tempe, AZ clubs: | Re: Hooray for Cox.. I sure bet you're happy they don't filter something you use. | |
|
 |  |
  nona
@comcast.net | drop service Oh, wait, they're the only cable company. But IF there were a way to hit them in the pocketbook, but wait, there isn't.
Wow, an epiphony. I always wondered why cox advertising was a bit arrogant. Because they can.
Stuff it cox. | |
|
 |  fiberguy My views are my own. Premium join:2005-05-20
| Re: drop service said by nona :
Stuff it cox. ... as said by a Comcast user.. seems you don't have anything to worry about what Cox is doing then, right? -- "Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and Im told its a womans prerogative..." | |
|
 |  |   gatorkram Spelling and Grammer impared Premium join:2002-07-22 Winterville, NC clubs:
·Embarq
·linode
| Re: drop service said by fiberguy :said by nona :
Stuff it cox. ... as said by a Comcast user.. seems you don't have anything to worry about what Cox is doing then, right? I just want to say, I don't use cox, or comcast, but I still worry about how they treat their end users. If we let one isp get away with abusing their users, some of the others might join them.
Considering the recent news items here, it seems this idea is correct.
People seem to fail to realize, these companies are in business to serve us. Without us, they disappear. -- Give me bandwidth or give me death! »/testhistory/661871/4f240 | |
|
 |
 helix139
join:2002-05-11 Lake Wales, FL | not just P2P... This would explain why ive been having a hell of a time trying to play Madden online on PS3 on Cox broadband. PSNetwork was working all fine and good but everytime I would try to establish a connection to an opponent, it would drop. | |
|
 |
|
 |