Slashdot Log In
FCC Reports Comcast P2P Blocking Was More Widespread
Posted by
Soulskill
on Wed Apr 23, 2008 05:12 PM
from the saw-that-coming dept.
from the saw-that-coming dept.
bob charlton from 66 tips us to a ComputerWorld story about FCC Chairman Kevin Martin, who has testified that Comcast's P2P traffic management occurred even when network congestion wasn't an issue, contrary to the ISP's claims. After defending its actions and being investigated by the FCC over the past few months, Comcast has tried to repair its image by making nice with BitTorrent and working towards a P2P Bill of Rights. Quoting:
"'It does not appear that this technique was used only to occasionally delay traffic at particular nodes suffering from network congestion at that time,' Martin told the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee. 'Based on testimony we've received thus far, this equipment was typically deployed over a wider geographic area or system, and is not even capable of knowing when an individual ... segment of the network is congested.'
Related Stories
[+]
Politics: FCC To investigate Comcast Bittorrent Meddling 196 comments
An anonymous reader writes "FCC Chairman Kevin Martin said Tuesday that the commission will investigate complaints that Comcast actively interferes with Internet traffic as its subscribers try to share files online. A coalition of consumer groups and legal scholars asked the agency in November to stop Comcast from discriminating against certain types of data and to fine Comcast $195,000 for every affected subscriber. While known for months in tech circles, the issue wasn't given broad attention until an Associated Press report last year, in which reporters tested and verified the data blocking."
[+]
Comcast Defends Role As Internet Traffic Cop 425 comments
RCTrucker7 writes "Comcast said yesterday that it purposely slows down some traffic on its network, including some music and movie downloads, an admission that sparked more controversy in the debate over how much control network operators should have over the Internet.
In a filing with the Federal Communications Commission, Comcast said such measures — which can slow the transfer of music or video between subscribers sharing files, for example — are necessary to ensure better flow of traffic over its network.
In defending its actions, Comcast stepped into one of the technology industry's most divisive battles. Comcast argues that it should be able to direct traffic so networks don't get clogged; consumer groups and some Internet companies argue that the networks should not be permitted to block or slow users' access to the Web."
[+]
Comcast Makes Nice with BitTorrent 161 comments
An anonymous reader writes "In a dramatic turn-around of relations, cable provider Comcast and BitTorrent are now working together. The deal comes as BitTorrent tries to put its reputation for illegal filesharing behind it. The companies are in talks to collaborate on ways to run BitTorrent's technology more smoothly on Comcast's broadband network. Comcast is actually entertaining the idea of using BitTorrent to transport video files more effectively over its own network in the future, said Tony Warner, Comcast's chief technology officer. '"We are thrilled with this," Ashwin Navin, cofounder and president of BitTorrent, said of the agreement. BitTorrent traffic will be treated the same as that from YouTube Inc., Google Inc. or other Internet companies, he said. It was important that Comcast agreed to expand Internet capacity, because broadband in the United States is falling behind other areas of the world, Navin said. Referring to the clashes with Comcast, he said: "We are not happy about the companies' being in the limelight."'"
[+]
Comcast, Pando Partner For "P2P Bill of Rights" 136 comments
Bibek Paudel writes "Comcast on Tuesday announced that it would partner with Pando Networks to create a P2P bill of rights for file-sharing networks and Internet service providers. Comcast and Pando will meet with industry experts, other ISPs, and P2P companies in order to come up with a set of rules that would clarify how a user can use P2P applications and how an ISP can manage file-sharing programs running on their networks. Last month, Comcast announced that it had reached an agreement with BitTorrent whereby Comcast agreed to alter its network management practices, and BitTorrent acknowledged that Comcast has the right to police its own network. Comcast's battle with P2P networks started last year after the Associated Press published an article that accused Comcast of blocking peer-to-peer services like BitTorrent. Comcast admitted to delaying P2P traffic during peak times, but denied that any file-sharing applications were being completely blocked."
Submission: FCC Chairman: Comcast blocking was widespread by Anonymous Coward
[+]
ISPs & P2P, Getting Along Without Getting Cozy 118 comments
penguin-geek writes "Researchers at Northwestern University have discovered a way to ease the tension between ISPs and P2P users. As we all know, there's been a growing tension between Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and their customers' P2P file-sharing services, and this has driven service providers to forcefully reduce P2P traffic at the expense of unhappy subscribers and the risk of government investigations. Recently, some ISPs have tried to fix the problem through partnerships with certain P2P applications. The Ono project represents an alternative solution: a software service that allows P2P clients to efficiently identify nearby peers, without requiring any kind of cozy relationship between ISPs and P2P users. Using results collected from over 150,000 users, they have found that their system locates peers along paths that have two orders of magnitude lower latency and 30% lower loss rates than those picked at random by BitTorrent, and that these high-quality paths can lead to significant improvements in transfer rates. In challenged settings where peers are overloaded in terms of available bandwidth, Ono provides a 31% average download-rate improvement; in environments with large available bandwidth, Ono increases download rates by 207% on average (and improves median rates by 883%). Ono is available as a plugin for the Azureus BitTorrent client, an open tracker and an standalone service you can integrate into any P2P system."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Comcast getting their just desserts (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Comcast getting their just desserts (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Anonymous Coward. (Score:5, Informative)
Anyway, as far as the packet meddling: it's done by a Sandvine box. There's thousands of them nationwide. There's one wherever there's a CMTS (Cisco UBR or Arris Cadant router) That means there's one in your neighborhood.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Ca
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course this was an ACCIDENT. It was not the result of a genuine desire by Comcast to make me happy.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It only truly went downhill circa 2000 when it tried to hand-out more customer contracts than bandwidth available, thus giving everybody the infamous "always busy" signal when they tried to dial-in. If Comcast is now run by former AOL managers,
Re: (Score:2)
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/just_deserts [wiktionary.org]
"Middle English originating from the old French 'deserte' meaning 'to deserve'. This in turn is from the Latin 'deservire' which in Vulgar Latin means 'to gain or merit by giving service'."
In other news... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Italians cheat at football.
Re: (Score:2)
They just play more aggressively and use 'creativity' to win matches.
Much like Enron and Citi used 'creative' accounting to make profits.
Much like Microsoft used 'creative' sales of XP to avoid taxes.
As long as its not illegal, am not cheating.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Suits don't know (Score:5, Interesting)
So, I can just imagine what they folks at the top were being told by "middle management".
Sigh.
And imagine, no one wanted Block D of the wireless spectrum to deliver wireless services and provide real alternatives. The Internet has been bought and sold to the highest bidders, and now we all have to live with the moronic decisions being made by people who are only interested in squeezing as much revenue of the porn addled, facebook addicted, morons paying the bills.
Re:Suits don't know (Score:5, Insightful)
Instead, they're actively (and randomly) interrupting P2P and causing -all- P2P traffic to fail, even at 4AM.
The sad thing is, I know exactly why this is happening. There's someone (or a group of people) who honestly believe that 'P2P is eating all our bandwidth' and that if they use this blocking method, it'll all be OK.
I worked at a place where the Network Manager would see what sites were 'eating all the bandwidth' and just knock them down to 56Kbits/sec for the whole place. What he didn't understand is that -using your bandwidth is a good thing-, it means you're not paying for more than you use. 'blocking' P2P or 'top-talkers' just makes the experience on a network suck, there are much more effective and subtle ways to manage traffic that quietly make the traffic you want more important than the traffic you don't want interfering.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
What he didn't understand is that -using your bandwidth is a good thing-, it means you're not paying for more than you use.
This is not accurate, however. The standard procedure when you are Comcast and are peering with Tier1 people like ATT and Cogent is to pay them money for each gig of data you send on to their network and vice versa. So you always want people to be sending packets to your network and you hate those pesky uploaders who are sending them out packets out of
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's much more nefarious than that. To understand why Comcast prevents people from uploading (seeding) torrents, but doesn't prevent people from downloading torrents, you need to understand how peering agreements between large backbone internet providers work.
ISP A (let's call them Comcast) wants
Surprised? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
"Blocking" (Score:5, Interesting)
I run lots of torrents, and have for years. I have always had a very very stable line with Prestige Digital Cable, whom was bought by Adelphia whom was eventually bought by Comcast. My service with Comcast started out bad, as the upload speeds were cut in half and the bill was almost doubled (over a course of 6 months) but the actual line was very very stable. I didn't pay for a static IP, but I had the same IP address for a very long time, as most people tend to have. Eventually one day my IP shifted to a new subnet which gave like 90% packet loss (tested 24/hrs a day and averaged out with some Linus scripting). I ran my PC straight into the modem (removing the Linksys router) and it gave me an IP on the old and trusted subnet, with no packet loss at all. When I hooked the router up it associated it's MAC and put me on the bad one again. So I cloned the PC's MAC to the router, and bada-bing I'm on the good subnet and back to my torrents. A few weeks go by and all of a sudden that MAC addy is being pushed onto the bad subnet. I clone another MAC addy and up onto the good subnet I go, and around and around we go. Eventually I got sick of it and canceled the service all together. When I called to cancel the woman was very friendly until she had a chance to pull up my account info, they she just told me "Your service is off. Goodbye, click", leading me to wonder if there is actually a note in my account that has me marked as a high-traffic user.
I realize most of this is based on paranoid speculation, so take it for what it's worth, but to be fair another friend of mine in the same town had the SAME EXACT situation take place. Just seems a little fishy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In most cases, yes, you'll have a choice between at most two broadband ISPs: your local cable company (providing cable Internet) and your local telephone company (providing DSL). Note that that's a maximum. In a noticeable number of areas you'll have only one. Sometimes it's because one or the other simply doesn't serve that chunk of real estate. Sometimes in the case of apartments, condominium complexes and newer developments it's because the owner/developer has given one company exclusive rights to provid
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Ars makes a mention in this article, but I can't be arsed to find a press release or Order on the FCC's site.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080319-fcc-overhauls-its-broadband-data-as-eu-points-and-laughs.html [arstechnica.com]
Re: (Score:2)
leading me to wonder if there is actually a note in my account that has me marked as a high-traffic user.
I wouldn't be surprised by that at all.
In the same vain, what amuses me is how I could call Roadrunner, whine about the price being too high and get whatever "promotional" deal they were currently running (even if said deal was only for new customers). Amazingly enough, if I tried to make the same request on behalf of a friend who lived too far out to get DSL they would refuse. Never refused when the request was made for someone who had an alternative though.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
People who work for bad companies tend to fit in there.
Re: (Score:2)
What's strange is how the customer service peons take the company's side on this kind of stuff--every single time.
People who work for bad companies tend to fit in there.
It's not so strange... it's called either (a) keeping your job (and they dont have a high retention rate), and/or (b) not knowing much (technically) beyond what the support docs on their screen tell them and thus not even realizing they are facilitating in this.
A perfect example was when I was a tech at CompUSA and we called HP to order a part. No, we didnt call the normal HP support line, we had a "Vendor Only" number.
US: "Hi, I'm calling because we need a new power supply for an HP Pavilion Piece of
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Not that I agree with it mind you, it's simply the cheaper alternative when
faced with bandwidth limiting or expanding your infrastructure.
If you can identify what may cause serious headaches for your network
and / or your available bandwidth you are simply one step closer to
making the call to minimize it's effect by whatever means you have available.
In this case, the degradation of the P2P applications in the hope that
the masses ' g
Re: (Score:2)
No. The major ISPs need to have their government-granted monopolies disallowed. In most cases, Comcast or some other company manages to influence local legislation in such a way that they are the only ones in the area permitted to lay wire (or fiber). _That_ is what needs to stop. The pressures of real competition would make these providers work to keep customers, as opposed to deliberately abusin
Re: (Score:2)
Sigh (Score:4, Interesting)
Anyone that has actually configured a sandvine box knows very well that you can set rules to run at any time they want. Anyone even minimally monitoring their network knows when their network is congested and can apply rules during those times.
To say that the sandvine isn't network aware is false. You would think that the chairman would have contacted the manufacturer or at least had an aide go to the website.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I was stating nothing about how they were used in the case. I don't know if they configured it to perform as you state, but they could have. Which is opposite to what he stated.
What he says the box cannot do is one of the reasons the box was sold. If I were sandvine, I'd make sure he corrected that issue.
Comcast is actually doing just what has been...... (Score:2)
Obvious!!! (Score:2)
Of Course It's Deliberate (Score:5, Funny)
Last month I got a phone call from a Comcast robot telling me my account was past due. At the time I did not realize that an autopayment had gone through 7 days earlier, so I immediately went and paid my balance online.
A few days later my bank calls and tells me one of my accounts is overdrawn. Not Comcast's fault, but I ask the bank rep--did the autopayment actually go through? Yes it did.
So I got on a live chat with a Comcast support agent who tells me that I was not double-billed, I was just charged twice for the same amount successfully. He was not authorized to issue a credit from his "location" so I called the billing department, where a rep told me the billing department does not have the ability to change autopayment settings.
When I mentioned the robot call that I should never have received and asked if he could tell a manager to look into it, his tone of voice conveyed such disbelief and confusion that at first I thought I'd misspoke and asked him what kind of underwear he had on or something. Then he tried to sell me phone service.
Coincidence?P2p blocking is old hat at Comcast (Score:2, Informative)
The semi-random port-blocking on 25 that they do often seems designed to optimize the ability of worms and viruses to spread while simultaneously forcing all legitimate traffic through their (failure prone) mailservers.
I had a lot of conversations with them about it and eventually gave
Re:fixed? (Score:4, Insightful)
They said they are working with BT, and working on this "bill of rights", and also admitting to slowing down the throttling.
I have never seen them say they are stopping such activities.
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Comcast No (does not limit BitTorrent bandwidth)
Which they clearly have bought Sandvine.com equipment specifically to do.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So conquest of wandering nomads is ok?
you got what i meant. if you didnt, let me explain plainly ; native american history is incomparable to ancient middle east history when concerning rights of ownership to a piece of land.
And this is relevant to the present day situation because....?
if you havent read and took time to asses what i wrote, i cant go over explaining everything again and again, apologies.
Why did you draw the conclusion that my argument was only directed at the Jews?
you are debating by questions i presume. regardless of who your argument was directed at, it justifies any and all occupation.