 BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | If you're not stealing then this doesn't affect you now does it? It's not affecting me. And don't tell me about "legitimate" torrent use. What's that, 0.1%? |
|
 kenn10
join:2003-09-10
Kennesaw, GA
1 edit | I agree with you, BF69. So long as my legitimate data and voice packets flow with minimal delay, I'm happy.
The obvious concern becomes over how Comcast can decide what is legitimate and what is not. We've seen cable companies try to block port 5060 for VOIP traffic as well.
The problem is with the torrent providers and they are who the internet services should go after. Its easy...you see torrents, shut down their Modem. |
|
|
|
rugbyI think I know it all.VIP
join:2000-09-26
Indianapolis, IN
1 edit | reply to BF69
Please stop it with the self-righteousness. You know NOT of what you speak. Just about every large download available has a torrent.
Fixed typo. |
|
 dadkinsCan you do Blu?Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
kudos:18 | reply to BF69
said by BF69:then this doesn't affect you now does it? It's not affecting me. And don't tell me about "legitimate" torrent use. What's that, 0.1%? But, I do use BT - for legal videos.
VUZE anyone?
This DOES affect me - and it's bullshit!
Percentage is irrelavent when *ALL* BT is getting hosed in a blanket action.
We won't mention all the other sources for "illegal" files that cruise right along without impedence.
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera |
|
 ropeguruPremium
join:2001-01-25
Mechanicsville, VA | reply to BF69
said by BF69:then this doesn't affect you now does it? It's not affecting me. And don't tell me about "legitimate" torrent use. What's that, 0.1%? But if I am not stealing, their throttling IS affecting me. They DO NOT distinguish between the two.
Please cite your references for legitimate use only being 0.1%. |
|
ropeguruPremium
join:2001-01-25
Mechanicsville, VA | reply to dadkins
said by dadkins:We won't mention all the other sources for "illegal" files that cruise right along without impedance. Exactly... How about shutting down all the binary items in the text based news groups. That would probably relieve more traffic than torrent downloads. |
|
| reply to dadkins
said by dadkins:said by BF69:then this doesn't affect you now does it? It's not affecting me. And don't tell me about "legitimate" torrent use. What's that, 0.1%? But, I do use BT - for legal videos. VUZE anyone? This DOES affect me - and it's bullshit! Percentage is irrelavent when *ALL* BT is getting hosed in a blanket action. We won't mention all the other sources for "illegal" files that cruise right along without impedence. The issue isn't legal or illegal for Comcast. It is that ALL bittorrent traffic screws up the system. Want to blame someone - blame the developers of a protocol that was designed to be a bandwidth hog on purpose without any regard for any other internet traffic.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
rugbyI think I know it all.VIP
join:2000-09-26
Indianapolis, IN | reply to kenn10
Your statement makes no sense. You make assumptions that torrents = piracy. That's not true, so get a new argument please.
ISP's should not throttle traffic period. If they don't have enough bandwidth maybe they should take some of their massive profits and invest it back into their infrastructure and stop being babies. |
|
 funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5 | reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:The issue isn't legal or illegal for Comcast. It is that ALL bittorrent traffic screws up the system. There is no evidence of this often-repeated claim.
said by fAcEtIOUs:Want to blame someone - blame the developers of a protocol that was designed to be a bandwidth hog on purpose All TCP applications will use all of the bandwidth that they can. The exceptions are programs that have a built-in limiter, which includes the top-two BitTorrent applications (uTorrent and Azureus-Vuze).
Furthermore, none of these applications do anything to abuse bandwidth. They can only use the bandwidth delegated to the subscriber by the modem and the CMTS scheduler.
said by fAcEtIOUs:without any regard for any other internet traffic. The applications don't "hack the modem" or DDOS other users in order to gain an advantage. They use the OS's network stack -- just like any other TCP application.
I want VOIP packets to have priority over BitTorrent, too. But I don't want Comcast, which should be a neutral transit provider, to make such decisions for me. I do hope that Comcast's eventual solution means that Comcast will acknowledge and react to the user's DSCP (QoS) flags in the IP header. Yes, some users will abuse these -- but such abuse is addressable by policy. If P2P file-sharers move their QoS flags above "best effort," I say throttle ALL their traffic to 256/64 for a month as a response!
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
FCC Public Hearing on the Future of the Internet - Thursday, April 17th - Stanford Univ., Calif. |
|
RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | Bravo! Excellent response and excellent description.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. |
|
| reply to ropeguru
Furthermore,
If they impede the 0.1% that is legit, isn't that an anticompetitive move? If, I as a buisness owner, decide to sell copies of my software via BT, comcast is blatantly blocking my ability to service the market |
|
 BoogeymanDrive it like you stole itPremium
join:2002-12-17
Panama City, FL | reply to kenn10
Seriously, do a little research. Even the US government is using bittorrent to distribute large files. |
|
RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | reply to backness
Change 'software' to 'video on demand' and you've hit it right on the nose. This is just the first assault against anything and everything that competes with their core video product.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. |
|
dadkinsCan you do Blu?Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
kudos:18
1 edit | reply to fAcEtIOUs
Nothing wrong with the protocol... it's the use(over use) by some people that may overload the network.
Thing is, we all know it's BS!
Why sell a fast connection if it cannot handle a little use?
16/2 is 16/2 no matter what I use for transit.
Whether I am uploading files to my FTP, or sharing the videos I get via BT legally... I can only send and receive at the rated speeds I pay for, right?
Remember, I trash the connection every month - at 22-27GB per month!
But my BT is getting hosed also. WTF?
Comcast(and the other ISPs) throttling this protocol are doing so in a blanket action.
If me (or even you) are using a BT client to get MariposaHD legally, and that is "hurting" their network... fix the damn network! 
While Little Jimmy is lit up 24/7 downloading/sharing whatever via BT and *may* be using his/his Mommy's connection to it's limits, it's irrelevant to those of us that want the latest HD In Motion(legal Exotic car videos in HD).
But we are getting our share ratios screwed into the ground because of no seeding/uploading? Bullshit!
My shit through BT is LEGAL, period!
My shit is getting screwed along side of all of what you are calling "piracy".
Either discern and kill *ONLY* the "bad" things, or back the hell off completely!
Trashing all of it is lame!
Better start killing HTTP too, huh?
WAY too much traffic on that protocol!
FTP too! 
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera |
|
funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5 | said by dadkins:My shit through BT is LEGAL, period! My shit is getting screwed along side of all of what you are calling "piracy". Either discern and kill *ONLY* the "bad" things, or back the hell off completely! Trashing all of it is lame! Better start killing HTTP too, huh? WAY too much traffic on that protocol! FTP too! All of the above protocols are TCP protocols. Comcast would solve the whole problem if they banned TCP! It's the illegalist of them all!     
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
FCC Public Hearing on the Future of the Internet - Thursday, April 17th - Stanford Univ., Calif. |
|
| reply to BF69
The thing is that there is no studies done on legitimate versus illegitimate P2P use, so it's anybody's guess as to how much P2P traffic is legit or not.
--
True Happiness Must Come From Within |
|
dadkinsCan you do Blu?Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
kudos:18
1 edit | reply to funchords
Yeah! That's it! That'll work... |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | reply to funchords
said by funchords:There is no evidence of this often-repeated claim. There's no proof that the often-repeated claim isn't valid. You seem fairly intelligent with IP, do you really think that unmanaged P2P applications on a network aren't capable of wreaking havoc?said by funchords:All TCP applications will use all of the bandwidth that they can. They only use the bandwidth that they need. P2P apps (BT in particular) were built to use everything available without reservation. Go look at the statement from Bram Cohen regarding one of his objectives in creating the BT protocol.said by funchords:They can only use the bandwidth delegated to the subscriber by the modem and the CMTS scheduler. Great. I say limit the crap out of P2P (ab)users. I recommend ISPs draw a line in the sand, cap usage, and charge overages along with connection throttling across the board for the users across that line. Beyond that, open the floodgates and let consumers use their connections however they feel is appropriate and for however much they're willing to pay. Flat billing needs to disappear in preparation of "protocol agnostic" management practices. |
|
| reply to BF69
said by BF69:And don't tell me about "legitimate" torrent use, because it would nullify my imaginary point. Edited for accuracy. I've seen you post this garbage numerous times, and in turn get rebuffed numerous times, yet you essentially close your eyes and plug your ears so you can just keep beating the same moronic drum. It's high time you gave it a rest. |
|
funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5
1 edit | reply to openbox9
It is that ALL bittorrent traffic screws up the system. said by openbox9:said by funchords:There is no evidence of this often-repeated claim. There's no proof that the often-repeated claim isn't valid.
C:\Users\Robb>tracert www.dslreports.com
Tracing route to dslreports.com [209.123.109.175]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.177.251
2 * * * Request timed out.
3 10 ms 10 ms 17 ms ge-1-11-ur03.beaverton.or.bverton.comcast.net [68.87.218.89]
4 46 ms 10 ms 11 ms te-9-1-ur04.beaverton.or.bverton.comcast.net [68.87.216.50]
5 33 ms 35 ms 29 ms te-8-4-ur05.beaverton.or.bverton.comcast.net [68.87.216.101]
6 30 ms 30 ms 41 ms te-9-1-ur06.beaverton.or.bverton.comcast.net [68.87.216.98]
You seem fairly intelligent with IP, do you really think that unmanaged P2P applications on a network aren't capable of wreaking havoc? If you configure anything badly, it will operate badly. uTorrent or Azureus, configured according to the instructions provided by those teams, behaves quite well.
All TCP applications will use all of the bandwidth that they can. They only use the bandwidth that they need.
P2P apps (BT in particular) were built to use everything available without reservation. Go look at the statement from Bram Cohen regarding one of his objectives in creating the BT protocol. Regardless of what Bram said, it behaves no differently with regard to filling the pipe than FTP, HTTP, SMTP, POP3, IMAP, etc.. There are exceptions, but it's a designed-in exception -- BITS, for example. I don't know how I can explain it any better.
They can only use the bandwidth delegated to the subscriber by the modem and the CMTS scheduler. Great. I say limit the crap out of P2P (ab)users.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
FCC Public Hearing on the Future of the Internet - Thursday, April 17th - Stanford Univ., Calif. |
|
