Slashdot Mirror

No, they are just pissed at having to buy new Sandvines and support contracts to filter traffic. Trust me, they ain't cheap.

You missed one. The number one bandwidth application on the Internet. YouTube.
FWIW, our household of four uses an average of 350 GB a month. Despite Comcast's claim that the average account uses 20 to 25 GB a month.

How is that "despite?" They're not saying that nobody uses that much, just that the average customer does. FYI, Sandvine agrees, they peg mean US broadband usage at 29GB/month. Median is quite a bit lower than that.

https://www.sandvine.com/trend...

I think you mis-remember.

Perhaps. So I'll tell you what, instead of going off of my memory I'll simply play a trump card that renders your entire argument moot. I'm not sure what in the hell would possess you to think that 19 billion could ever come close to rebuilding the entire global internet infrastructure, but I'll tell you this: It costs some 5 times that amount minimum each year just to keep ISPs running, forget about rebuilding it from scratch, and forget about the non-ISP infrastructure (which by far does not make up the whole internet.) The US ISP figure alone is already well known and proven to cost more than your figure every year, at any rate.

www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2012/03/14/how-much-does-the-internet-cost-to-run/

Think about this for a second: How much less infrastructure would we need if we wouldn't spend 90% of SMTP traffic on spam and half of HTTP traffic on advertisement and tracking?

Probably very little, if any at all. Given your existing belief that 19 billion could rebuild the internet (or even rebuild it multiple times as you ambiguously implied,) I don't believe you can even fathom what you're talking about here. Believe it or not, SMTP and web traffic is gzip compressed. Yes, you read that right, it is quite literally the same algorithm as the gzip binary found in a *nix environment. Gzip compresses that kind of traffic especially well (here's a technical exercise for you: run wireshark and analyze your web traffic as you send and receive it across the wire.) Another algorithm called deflate is also commonly used. Not only that, but it only makes up a very tiny portion of the overall internet traffic.

In fact, web traffic alone makes up perhaps 16% of the global internet's bandwidth usage. SMTP traffic is so small that it actually makes up for less than a single percent.

https://www.sandvine.com/downl...

As for your advertising? These come in the form of cookies that typically sit in the range of tens to hundreds of bytes. That is a very tiny portion of web traffic.

I'm not sure what kind of communist revolution you're trying to inspire here, but these notions about the internet having no commercial dependence, or that advertising is hogging the pipes and possibly ruining the internet (quite the opposite in fact) are heavily heavily flawed.

Thank you, and perhaps consider paying cuba, north korea, or venezuela a visit before you start that revolution, I'm sure they'll give you some handy tips on how to properly build propaganda, because what you're doing isn't working.

The numbers given for Netflix and Youtube are all peak period figures, usually the local evening. Take a look at the Sandvine report at https://www.sandvine.com/downloads/general/global-internet-phenomena/2013/2h-2013-global-internet-phenomena-report.pdf .

Guess what Sandvine is selling: http://www.sandvine.com/customers/cable_providers.asp "Differentiated Services -- prioritize multimedia applications to ensure a high-quality online experience for subscribers (VoIP, IPTV, gaming)"

Can you believe it? I'm sure Comcast execs bought right into this.

Traffic Management

Manage Growing Bandwidth Demands. Ensure Subscriber Satisfaction.

File-sharing traffic continues to dominate service provider networks despite earlier suggestions that Peer-to-Peer (P2P) applications would diminish with emerging online trends and industry pressure. This popular technology has become a mass-market application and remains a key driver for broadband adoption in today's competitive market.

The implication for service providers is clear: file-sharing will continue to consume bandwidth and stress both the access network and Internet transit links. Proactive steps are needed to manage these immense costs and with broader subscriber usage, an intelligent approach to managing P2P traffic that preserves the online experience must be considered

Sandvine's Intelligent Traffic Management solution offers the widest range of policy management options to significantly reduce transit bandwidth costs and CAPEX spending on access networks. Service providers can adopt new intelligent techniques or more traditional approaches depending on their business environment.

With Sandrine's subscriber-friendly solutions, service providers can achieve cost savings while increasing customer loyalty.

They cut any connection open too long or any IP have "too many" open connections, they are also doing deep packet inspection with the Sandvine Policy Traffic Switch or something similar.

It's impossible to workaround the Comcast (or should I say Sandvine ) technique by only fixing something on your end . Those forged reset packets are going to both participants in the conversation. Because both sides think the other person wants to hang up, the session is permanently discarded. It's then up the application to decide if it wants to initiate a new conversation. This wouldn't be so obnoxious to the non-bit torrent world if it wasn't also harming other systems, such as Hamachi VPN, Lotus Notes, and sometimes even Google (still can't explain the logic behind that, but there are packet traces to prove it).

I have been told that they are using Sandvine.

http://www.sandvine.com/products/p2p_element.asp

This article on Yahoo! News points to Sandvine.

However, neither Comcast or Sandvine would comment about the technology being used.

Companies like Sandvine Inc. transparently do this -- effectively conflating geographic and cost network topologies.

http://www.sandvine.com/products/p2p_element.asp

-r.

The ISP's don't want to spend the money on new hard/software to better track users traffic. I work for a company http://www.sandvine.com/ (not to advertise) who's main focus is the traffic. If more ISP's spent a little money now, and managed the traffic a little better, they could prevent spam from ever spreading. But I guess you are right.
"The problem is that to an ISP, you're just a $50 check every month"

Anonymous Coward,
M.Smith

The available technology for network traffic management is becoming extremely sophisticated -- check out the offerings of Sandvine and Allot.

With the products from these vendors (among others), carriers can prioritize traffic across their entire network -- in some cases this becomes a sizable chunk of the Internet. The traffic management products integrate seamlessly to the billing systems -- think "click here for a 10 minute, 2 GB speed boost for $10."

At some point, some website will sign a deal to guarantee a certain amount of throughput to their site, or for a special event, etc. It starts with carriers "recouping costs" by ensuring QoS on the Superbowl and then quickly gets ugly. When will Microsoft Live (Hotmail, etc.) sign a deal to ensure it loads faster than Google?

Sandvine PTS

Slightly more technical description of services provided. Notable quote: "QoS policies can be set for latency sensitive applications like VoIP and gaming."

If you try to read through the buzzwordese it might actually make sense. Although, I think this is probably overkill for what you want.

Sandvine PTS

Slightly more technical description of services provided. Notable quote: "QoS policies can be set for latency sensitive applications like VoIP and gaming."

If you try to read through the buzzwordese it might actually make sense. Although, I think this is probably overkill for what you want.

No, what will actually happen is they will deploy products to mitigate the problem much more effectively without pissing off their users (like they are already doing): http://www.sandvine.com

Bittorrent is being actively discriminated against by ISPs, e.g. slowing down long-term Bittorrent seeding.

Do you have a cite for this?

http://www.sandvine.com/solutions/traffic_mgmt.asp

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.

We have a piece of equipment by a company called Sandvine which can mitigate virus threats, monitor traffic by protocol, etc. without anything needing to be installed by the actual end user. The drawback in the college setting is that they would need at least one of these boxes for every building on campus in order to effectively mitigate the virus threat. Not only that, but there is a yearly maintainence fee for support from them as well. But the way I see it, with most colleges costing you $10,000+/year to attend school there and live on campus, it's the least they can do if they're serious about "protecting the end-user".

That's why you get ISP's blocking p2p ports. And when they do, they just piss off their customers. That's why there needs to be more things like this. This may not be the solution but at least it's a step in the right direction.

Sandvine Incorporated has an interesting solution to this situation... Sandvine, Inc.

Sandvine, Incorporated has a p2p optimizer for ISPs - could prove to be interesting...