Slashdot Mirror

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/64623

I hope they are not in the wrong list, or data base.
http://www.criminalcheck.com/

I recently switched from Sprint to Cingular to Verizon so I have some experience with all three. My only true data point is that in Albuquerque, NM I am able to get 120kbps using Verizon's 1X CDMA, and in Los Angeles I was able to get significantly faster (but I didn't benchmark it) using Verizon's EV-DO.

Here are some nominal numbers for the technology that's been around for the past few years:
Cingular GPRS: 32-48 kbps
Sprint 1X CDMA: 80-120 kbps
Verizon 1X CDMA: 80-120 kbps

Of the newer crop of technologies that are coming out:
Cingular EDGE: 80-200 kbps
Sprint EV-DO: 400-700 kbps
Verizon EV-DO: 400-700 kbps

Of course, "your mileage may vary"... Cingular's EDGE service is more accessible than the other "new technologies" at this point because it's a simpler technology that really just allows your wireless device to combine multiple channels at once for higher speeds. Make sure your wireless card supports EDGE and that EDGE is available in your area before going with Cingular. (Plus their customer service is awful, but that's another story...)

Sprint and Verizon's EV-DO technology is currently available in 30-40 major cities, which doesn't sound like it will help you any but it may get to your area eventually. In the mean time, their 1X CDMA gives you better than dialup, so if you can be happy with ~120 kbps, this might work for you.

Most cellular companies give you 15 days to cancel service without paying any penalties, so I'd ask about availability of EDGE and EV-DO in your area, then pick one and try it. (Or pick both and try them.) Run some broadband speed tests (http://www.dslreports.com/stest and others) at various times of day and see what kind of speeds you're getting. If it's too slow, return it and get your money back, though you'll probably lose your activation fee and have to pay a prorated monthly bill.

Why do you guys steal from dslreports and then claim it as being from another site??

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/64105

That was posted 16 hours before the news made it to Slashdot, and yet somehow Slashdot ignores it?

This isn't the first time. What's up with you guys hating on Dsl reports?!

I recently switched from Sprint to Cingular to Verizon so I have some experience with all three. My only true data point is that in Albuquerque, NM I am able to get 120kbps using Verizon's 1X CDMA, and in Los Angeles I was able to get significantly faster (but I didn't benchmark it) using Verizon's EV-DO.

Here are some nominal numbers for the technology that's been around for the past few years:
Cingular GPRS: 32-48 kbps
Sprint 1X CDMA: 80-120 kbps
Verizon 1X CDMA: 80-120 kbps

Of the newer crop of technologies that are coming out:
Cingular EDGE: 80-200 kbps
Sprint EV-DO: 400-700 kbps
Verizon EV-DO: 400-700 kbps

Of course, "your mileage may vary"... Cingular's EDGE service is more accessible than the other "new technologies" at this point because it's a simpler technology that really just allows your wireless device to combine multiple channels at once for higher speeds. Make sure your wireless card supports EDGE and that EDGE is available in your area before going with Cingular. (Plus their customer service is awful, but that's another story...)

Sprint and Verizon's EV-DO technology is currently available in 30-40 major cities, which doesn't sound like it will help you any but it may get to your area eventually. In the mean time, their 1X CDMA gives you better than dialup, so if you can be happy with ~120 kbps, this might work for you.

Most cellular companies give you 15 days to cancel service without paying any penalties, so I'd ask about availability of EDGE and EV-DO in your area, then pick one and try it. (Or pick both and try them.) Run some broadband speed tests (http://www.dslreports.com/stest and others) at various times of day and see what kind of speeds you're getting. If it's too slow, return it and get your money back, though you'll probably lose your activation fee and have to pay a prorated monthly bill.

Over the last couple of years a number of small companies have started to offer fixed wireless solutions to consumers outside of the service areas of cable and dsl. They are quite reliable and with speeds around 1Mbit/sec. This companies tend to be quite localized so you will have to do your own research to find out if there is a company in your area.

A couple of links:
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/dslalt
http://www.efirehose.net/ (this link is specific to the Calgary area)

The cingular card works here (Dallas/Fort Worth) and http://dslreports.com/ tests my connection at 170K sec (down) consistently. Up stream is even faster. That is better than my DSL was until I upgraded to it to the 3Mb connection. I have only used it for a week so far, but so far, so good.

I totally agree. I have been down the Netgear MP101 and can I say that the box is a big load of rubbish. It continually skips. Netgear keep releasing patches, and keep saying "on the next release we promise to fix streaming problems" (see here). But they dont (at least not yet).

I tried using their own software - XP based. rubbish. I tried the twonkyvision server. Nope.

There's lots of unhappy MP101 users out there.

Then I bought a squeezebox. What a joy. The server runs on anything (perl). The box is reliable, quick, slick. The boxes can be controlled from the server (turn on, change look etc). The boxes are *really* easy to configure. I have my music on the mythbox which streams it to my stereo and PC. I have squeezeboxen in the bedroom and garage.

My advice - dont waste time with the cheap crap. The extra few dollars for a squeezebox is worth it .

It's Monday morning (7:41am) here in the states. I'm sitting at my desk in the office. The life blood of my day (coffee) on the desk half consumed and I'm laughing.

Slow news day or not, it works, you want really lame "news" go here http://www.dslreports.com/

[some content removed to get past the lameness filter, see original post]

Looks to me like Google broke their own DNS zones. Querying their nameservers DIRECTLY for e.l.google.com works -- I get an A record back -- but going through normal means, I don't.

So, my guess is that someone forgot to increase the serial number when changing zones, the hostmaster updated the zones but forgot to toss in an A record for e.l.google.com initially (then later updated the zones, but haven't been updated in peoples' DNS cache tables because the queries for e.l.google.com failing are already cached and wont de-cache until the expiry is reached), or there's something majorly screwed with their DNS setup entirely.

In English: all of the above basically says that 1 out of 4 DNS requests will fail, until DNS caches everywhere are flushed, or newer records are pulled down from Google's nameservers.

no
you idiot,
what is actually happening is your being ignorant.

it happens to me as well.

dont just spot discount things as people being stupid. Shaw.ca does this to me. I can download a file from any big website (Microsoft, adobe, macromedia, etc) at 7 MEG DOWN. thats 700 kps in firefox. I can download at 7 meg from my workplaces FTP server at a colo. a 10 meg file takes about 10 seconds to download. I run BT 24/7. I have never seen it climb more than 20kps . most of the time it hovers around 4 kps.

I have a linux router. I run my own DNS (before that it would randomly drop me like grand parent). I can play any game with no lag, no packetloss download huge files but BT maxes out at 4-20 kps.

But perhaps you would liek some evidence, OK so i shall point you in These Various Directions.

From the last link:
"Instead of spending the big bucks to upgrade capacity, the company allegedly green-lighted the use of an Ellacoya switch to limit Bit Torrent traffic at various hubs on the Shaw network. While the idea started in the Cordova area of Vancouver, the source claims, it has now been applied to the entire Shaw network in order to regain some of their "lost" bandwidth."

Here is the press release from ellacoya

Ill probably get modded down for being agressive, but so many people discount people as having no knowledge instead of actually listening to them.

no
you idiot,
what is actually happening is your being ignorant.

it happens to me as well.

dont just spot discount things as people being stupid. Shaw.ca does this to me. I can download a file from any big website (Microsoft, adobe, macromedia, etc) at 7 MEG DOWN. thats 700 kps in firefox. I can download at 7 meg from my workplaces FTP server at a colo. a 10 meg file takes about 10 seconds to download. I run BT 24/7. I have never seen it climb more than 20kps . most of the time it hovers around 4 kps.

I have a linux router. I run my own DNS (before that it would randomly drop me like grand parent). I can play any game with no lag, no packetloss download huge files but BT maxes out at 4-20 kps.

But perhaps you would liek some evidence, OK so i shall point you in These Various Directions.

From the last link:
"Instead of spending the big bucks to upgrade capacity, the company allegedly green-lighted the use of an Ellacoya switch to limit Bit Torrent traffic at various hubs on the Shaw network. While the idea started in the Cordova area of Vancouver, the source claims, it has now been applied to the entire Shaw network in order to regain some of their "lost" bandwidth."

Here is the press release from ellacoya

Ill probably get modded down for being agressive, but so many people discount people as having no knowledge instead of actually listening to them.

The "No Fly" list is considered to be national security, and so is not public record.

And you have yet again missed the point. What makes you think a "No View" list would not be considered to be "national security". Do you have any rational basis for your belief?

UPS and FedEx both do letter delivery on the same time frame as USPS. The USPS also does tracking, signature verification, and time sensitive delivery. This could have been verified from their web site.

UPS and FedEx do not compete with the USPS for letter delivery, which is over 90% of the USPS business. A first-class leter dropped off to the USPS at a bulk-mail unit costs approximately $.27 for delivery anywhere in the United States. The same 1-ounce envelope will cost you several dollars from UPS, and not less than $11.21 from FedEx. Obviously, they are not competitors. The USPS provides marginal guaranteed delivery, and only provides verified delivery when required by statue. They are not in competition. FedEx and UPS derive a huge margin of their profit from parcel delivery. I work daily in the mailing business, I can assure you, you are 100% wrong. FedEx/UPS/DHL/whoever do not compete at all with USPS, and vice-versa.

As for expansion: my town has authority over my town. It cannot decide to start running roads or levying taxes on a neighboring town. Similarly it cannot decide to start running fibre, building roads, or passing laws in another town.

Yes, your town. However, your county has some authority over all cities and towns in your county. You state has authority over your town. The Federal government has authority over. This is, for example, how the Federal government can demand that libraries must install filtering software even though the libraries are located in your town. You have no rationale basis for denying that municipal broadband will be regulated by the federal government. They are already regulate municipal cable, phone, and other services. What rationale basis do you have for believing they will not get involved in regualting "your" town's broadband?

Private broadband quality has deteriorated over time. Like I said, just because more people can get it doesn't make it better. More people can get McDonald's food now than twenty years ago, but the food is still lower quality. We could play "is too; is not" for the next month, but it wouldn't spontaneously invent proof on your part. I stated where the quality dropped.

More access, more bandwidth, lower prices. More subscribers. More choice. People are largely satisfied by their ISP service. Just because you aren't doesn't mean that your local community and the taxpayers should fund your petty demands.

Nothing makes me think municipal internet wouldn't do that, but the residents would have a say in its operation. You don't have that with a private company.

Most users aren't going to care about the things you feel make crappy service. Bandwidth limitations, port blocking, etc do not affect the majority of users. You will still be a huge minority. If everyone feels they have fine service, and you are complaining, you have no recourse at all. You are again in the minority. Except now there are no competitors at all, and no prospect for competition.

In many places your only choice is an ILEC or cable carrier.

Right. What's wrong with that? Two choices, instead of one.

You have provided no rationale basis for why municipal broadband will be better than private access. There is no technical reason: the technology will be equal.

And what is this "no alternative" garbage. If people were unhappy with municipal offerings, they don't have to use it, just like now with private offerings. They could say with the private company, they could just not have internet, they could use dial-up. It isn't like the cable operators and ILECs are just going to up and remove all their

For speed testing I used Broadband Reports's site.

In 1xRTT-land I got 70up/30dn most of the time. About 1/4 of the time I'd get 110up/50dn. At the worst (only a few times, and usually when the evening commute hours put a lot of traffic near where I was parked) I'd get about 50/10. Compared to a 56k modem (about 26/20 on the same tool when I tried it), this isn't bad.

I've had 4 computers using it at the same time. While it will start to gronk on images with multiple access it's truly not that bad. And no, we're not using any kind of proxy, cache or compressor.

I've yet to get this system out under EVDO coverage yet, save for the single test that got me 600dn (found one local tower where it was activated. Didn't last. Hrmf). When EVDO hits my area (or I take a trip into an EVDO area) I'll put up better metrics.

Compared to GPRS (my old wireless link) it's much nicer.

Ironically, that same update describes Comcast's nationwide problems that started last night (US Time) and says it was caused by an equipment upgrade and not related to the DNS Cache poisoning. BUT, the problem was not network connectivity, but the DHCP's DNS Servers became unavailable. Read more at DSLReports and (from first hand experience), the work-around was fairly easy which was to manually specify the DNS server, rather than use the DHCP'd one. Comcast says it was resolved about two hours ago - scroll down to the bottom of the page.

Hey, you might can have a 30 second skip on your Comcast DVR.
Try this:
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,11973771~mo de=flat/
It works on mine.

Sometime around November 2004 Shaw started to packet shape bittorrent in Vancouver. I'm not familiar with the technical specifics, but I can tell you that my bittorrent uploads dropped to under 5K/sec (and as such my downloads died as well).

This only affects motorola modems. Since then I have switched to a terayon modem and I can again upload at 40-50K/sec (although I think a lot of people did this as my connection sometimes gets very slow during peak times).

I've heard that they have since introduced packet shaping in the rest of the Country but I'm not 100% certain of this.

Here are a couple sources: Shaw Throttling Bit Torrent? and Shaw ISP Customers Experience BitTorrent Slowdown

Parent is not a troll. This is only done in some regions though. That is why not all users are affected. Just browse their forum at Broadband reports to confirm it yourself.

http://www.dslreports.com/forum/shaw

There's a mirror here: http://googlex.foxified.info/, from someone in ATM at DSLR.

There are other cheap 1-line FXO cards. The ENF656-ESW-INPR card is one. This one uses the same chipset as the discontinued Wildcard X100P. It has a different PCI vendor ID though, so you'll have to add the PCI vendor ID to the source and recompile to get it to work with Asterisk.

This might explain why p0rn was forced upon them Arlo Gilbert CEO of iDownload

I bought DSL for some friends as a present for a year for $25 per month from Sonic.net. From what my friends have told me they have been very happy with the service. If you look somewhere like DSLReports.com you might find that DSL in your area costs less than you think.

Lavasoft has found a new way to make money. Aparrently Ad-Aware no longer removes WhenU spyware. I wonder if the kickback from taking bribes will be enough to offset the sales losses created by MSFT's product?

While I can't really comment on voice over IP as I've never used it I have read a lot about over the Broadband Reports forums. You may want to stop by and ask your question there.

http://www.dslreports.com/forum/voip

While I can't really comment on voice over IP as I've never used it I have read a lot about over the Broadband Reports forums. You may want to stop by and ask your question there.

http://www.dslreports.com/forum/voip

While I can't really comment on voice over IP as I've never used it I have read a lot about over the Broadband Reports forums. You may want to stop by and ask your question there.

http://www.dslreports.com/forum/voip

i have no clue, but apparently it works.
check here.

The workaround for firefox seems to be an edit to your compreg.dat. For windows

c:\Documents and Settings\$USER\Application Data\Mozilla\Firefox\Profiles\default.random\compr eg.dat

For UNIX

~/.mozilla/firefox/default.random/compreg.dat

Removing the line that references IDN makes the problem go away. Using Find, there was a single reference for the UNIX host and 2 for the Win32 host. Removing the lines and restarting the browser makes the attack fail regardless of the about:config/userprefs.js value. Here's an example entry.

{4byteshex-2byteshex-2byteshex-2byteshex-6byteshex },@mozilla.org/network/idn-service;1,,nsIDNService ,rel:libnecko.so

Here are a few links that I found while googling around. They should be of some help.
Quite a few Wireless Network Links
Long Distance Wireless Network Project
Wireless Network Security Article
Forum discussion concerning long range wireless routers

Now I just have to wait until it hits our area...

Click here to see if its in your area!

Here is a good forum for discussing it:

DSL Reports Verizon FIOS Forum

Here are some samples of the FIOS speeds! They are crazy!!

Now I just have to wait until it hits our area...

Click here to see if its in your area!

Here is a good forum for discussing it:

DSL Reports Verizon FIOS Forum

Here are some samples of the FIOS speeds! They are crazy!!

No offence meant to Mr. Gates, as he has given a lot more of his money to charitable causes than a lot of people, and even more importantly he seems to really care about them.

Apparently you missed the leaked memo. Just before the Bill Gates Foundation was set up, someone leaked a memo from Microsoft's PR department that advised Gates to consider philanthropy as a way to improve Microsoft's public image during the anti-trust trials. (I've done some searching, but it seems to have disappeared into the memory hole, perhaps someone else can dredge up a copy?)

Also, the "charity" uses its money to accumulate major stakes in companies that just happen to be aligned with Microsoft's interests.

Well, here's a start. It references Dow Jones News. They also invested hundreds of millions of dollars in drug company stock, which coincidentally occurred at the exact same time Microsoft started pushing much harder for stronger IP laws. Back in 2002 they had over $21 billion. Also note that they are not required by law to disclose stock holdings.

The company making the charges is listed on ROKSO and SPEWS and sparked similar controversy with a Slashdot article last year. The defendant, Jay Stuler calls it a "frivolous lawsuit designed to harass and intimidate" and is asking for PayPal donations to help him fight it. More at Spamfo and DSL reports

Most BPL trials in the US have been a disastaster. It is a "marketing technology"

Bull. You CAN turn off the router functionaly and place the 2-wire Home Portal into Bridge Mode. Just go to http://homeportal/management, Click "Advanced", and uncheck "Routing Enabled".

If you are talking about not being a lot of IP addresses from Overpeer being involved, you might want to check the list posted at DSLReports.com on this page: http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12245912~mo de=flat~days=9999~start=20/ That looks like a lot of IP addresses to me. Also look at what bobince wrote in the same thead: http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12258802~mo de=flat/

If you are talking about not being a lot of IP addresses from Overpeer being involved, you might want to check the list posted at DSLReports.com on this page: http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12245912~mo de=flat~days=9999~start=20/ That looks like a lot of IP addresses to me. Also look at what bobince wrote in the same thead: http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12258802~mo de=flat/

Haha -- at some points, the letter from the MPAA is just wrong. They list Columbia, Twentieth Century Fox, Warner Bros., etc., as the copyright owner for files such as 50_First_Dates.torrent. Take a look at page 5, linked from here.

Do they even know what a .torrent is? Someone should inform these lawyers that their clients don't, actually, own what they're claiming to own. There's probably some felony charge associated with that sort of behavior.

What are you talking about?

RTFA

Limit your upload bandwidth.

Taken from here
-------
AT LAST!
I've got a chance to reply to some of these rumours and wild speculation!
(YES - this is going to be one of the Puppy's long boring posts,
but if you don't read it all, don't bother replying - NO CRIB NOTES AVAILABLE)

Firstly, I have to say,
I am extremely dissapointed with the response from some of the members of the TB community.
Scare-mongering and spreading rumours is not the most helpful thing to do in a situation like this!
I know everyone is unhappy about it, but don't burn your bridges with insults or by playing the blame game!

Secondly,
I am extremely delighted with the reponse form some of the members of the TB community.
Members like DeeJee, and Warlok, who are trying to keep us all together,
to get the correct information out. There are probably more that I don't know about yet....
and all those working behind the scenes.... Thanks guys

OK lets get down to it.
A few facts:-
- I am extremely sad to report, that I have just found out that, TB, as we know it, is DEAD.
- The full reason why Rb choose to close down is still not yet known
- Rb was "on holiday" when the site went down, and is in no position to put it back up again,
or explain anything, until he gets back
- There was a Ddos attack - After the site went down!

One more fact:-
Nobody, REPEAT, nobody, except Redbeard knows what Redbeard is planning to do.

Keep watching torrentbits.org for a statement.
It's the ONLY place to get the full facts

http://www.dslreports.com/comment/2413/47493

Packet8 doesn't have the features of Vonage (like I would love to have email notification of voicemail), but at 20$ a month, it felt great to tell Verizon off one last time.

Funny thing though, you start to develop a paranoia regarding the quality. A lot of my friends have called me from their cell phones, and I think my phone is freaking when they are actually walking under a bridge or going down to their basement.

certification process with a familiar big ass logo that says "Spyware Free."

They already do. The problem is whether you can trust the issuer.

I'm not sure who is going to give sn.org/lt.com any sympathy over this, they are just glorified warez sites, after all.

Although this DoS does highlight the largest problem with BitTorrent - it still relies on a central(tracker) server to operate.

I believe it's that specific "function" of BT that got me one of those nifty letters in the mail. I can't see any kind of a workable solution to this problem, everything that has to do with file trading has an entry point somewhere along the line.

Not really true. Some CWS variants are really really hard to remove (in extreme cases, using the oxymoronically-named HackerDefender rootkit to disguise itself, plus hide and shut down CWShredder, AdAware, Spybot S&D et al when you try to install them), but everything is possible.

Basically, if CWShredder, Spybot and AdAware don't work for you, and you can't see anything on your HijackThis! log, first step is to search on the now slightly outdated CWS Chronicles and then on many of the excellent anti-spyware forums out there, all of which have encountered more variants of CWS than you could ever imagine. If you can't find someone else with the same problem, then post your HJT logs and other stuff and someone should be able to help you.

These parasites (it's not all spyware anymore) are now really, really, really out of hand - the CWS people, especially, but there's even worse people out there - and something needs to be done to stop them. Unfortunately, that's not going to happen anytime soon - since the companies that make most of these are "legitimate businesses", as opposed to idiot teenagers with Visual Basic. Shame.

I wouldn't know... I can't use the client since AT&T installed Sandvine here in IL and started blocking bittorrent.

more info here

Talking of asymmetric and symmetric key sizes, there have been many discussions on the theoretical cracking of (1024 bits) RSA.
See http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interes ting-people/200204/msg00109.html

(Also from this link)

NIST says: "For data that needs to be protected longer [than 2015], the key size should be at least 2048 bits." (Otherwise they recommend that the RSA keysize be at least 1024 bits)

RSA also says: "..high-value organization [RSA] keys should be at least 2048 bits"

So you would think anyone who knows about security would want to know the asymmetric key size as well as the symmetric key size of the secure web site they're visiting.

Not so. In Mozilla/Firefox you can see at a glance the symmetric key size sure, but to find out the asymmetric key size you have to find the actual key and calculate it yourself. In Mozilla you can reject ciphers based on symmetric encryption method and hash method but not whether they have low asymmetric (RSA) keys. It is theoretically possible for a "secure" website to use an obscenely low RSA key, let's say 72 bits but use a 256 bit AES symmetric cipher. Mozilla/Firefox will most likely proudly say that the site uses "high grade" security anyway!

You would think this would be a priority for Mozilla developers, right? Wrong.

This has been in Bugzilla for years, with numerous duplicates yet no-one is working on it.

See: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=78837
Also see: http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,11293626~mo de=flat

Sandvine's product is being speculated as the culprit. More details here. Is there anyway around this? I don't want to be stuck downloading new distros (which are coming soon) with slow BT.

Sandvine's product is being speculated as the culprit. More details here. Is there anyway around this? I don't want to be stuck downloading new distros (which are coming soon) with slow BT.

Mod yourself +1 envious!