Comcast Accused of Blocking VoIP

kamikaze-Tech writes "Comcast, the largest USA Broadband provider is being accused of VoIP blocking, just days before they release their own VoIP offering. According to a long standing thread on the Vonage Forums, many Comcast ISP users are unable to use Vonage. Tempers are flaring: 'Although you will see all manner of opinions on this thread, there seems to be a sentiment that - politely put - Comcast could really be doing a better job of carrying Vonage bits.' Looks as though this could be the beginning of the broadband quality wars, with Comcast taking the first step."

Comments

Perhaps Comcast is just inadequate?

[eldavojohn]

All these ideas are entirely possible but it could simply be that Comcast doesn't provide the kind of broadband consistently necessary to use VoIP.

My experience with Comcast has been extensive and I am nothing but a little dissatisfied with how consistent my connection broadband width was. I'm not complaining that I lost connections (though I know people who have) but I will complain that my upload and download widths were anything but stable.

I eagerly await the broadband over power lines initiative that's inevitably going to be made available to everyone. Imagine paying for broadband but not having to pay also the cost of using an extensive cable network. Brilliant idea! Use rudimentary piggy backing techniques to deliver two signals through one line. It's actually not that difficult, I'm not sure why this took so long to develop and why it's taking even longer to make available to the public. Yes, I've heard of security concerns but there's got to be some encryption you can use.

If I ever live to see the day where cable is obsolete, I'm going to uncap my modem and host something huge to my friends. Anyone care to take a guess on how long I'd be able to keep that up before they shut me down?

Re:Perhaps Comcast is just inadequate?

[Buffo]

>>I eagerly await the broadband over power lines initiative

ARGH!

There are serious issues with BPL. It generates interference that compromises several amateur radio bands, and is likewise interfered with by the legal operation of numerous low-power transmitters. (This includes CB radio transmitters as well as ham radio transmitters.)

Visit http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/ for more information.

Re:Perhaps Comcast is just inadequate?

[garcia]

Anyone care to take a guess on how long I'd be able to keep that up before they shut me down?

Anywhere from a few minutes to 24 hours. The uncapped modems were usually scanned for at least twice daily. First "offense" and your modem was cycled remotely and the correct cfg file was downloaded again "capping" your modem. Your account was flagged and a ticket was opened for you. If you did it again then you were booted permanently for a TOS violation. Depending on the severity of the uncapping (10+mbit/10+mbit) you might be banned on the first violation.

Some people were referred to legal services after their first offense and ATTBI was looking to prosecute for theft of service.

Not a good idea, really.

Re:Perhaps Comcast is just inadequate?

[bigpat]

All these ideas are entirely possible but it could simply be that Comcast doesn't provide the kind of broadband consistently necessary to use VoIP.

Well, there is an easy test. If their VOIP works fine and other people's don't then they are probably gumming up the lines with QoS. ISPs have been working on different levels of service for differently labeled packet s of data for a while now and I think it should be clear to everyone that QoS really stands for "pick your pocket", not "quality of service". Quality of Service is fine when companies like Comcast don't have local monopolies or don't collude with their only other competitor... potentially that would be Verizon in my area, in order to fix service offerings.

I am libertarian, but QoS (or whatever they want to relabel it as) is an area which needs regulation. Make them simple regulations, make them so that they promote competition. Unfortunately maybe the only way to do this is to prevent ISPs from offering any add on services at all, other than basic bandwidth, addressibility and letting them charge flat published and competitive rates for QoS which get charged directly to the customer and aren't a part of secret deals. Otherwise it will be nearly impossible to prevent them from deciding which services succeed and which ones fail if they control the playing field, the referees and have their players in the game all at the same time. If gone unchecked, they could prevent other companies and other services from being provided to their customers, literally, at the flip of a switch.

Re:Perhaps Comcast is just inadequate?

[BVis]

The people who are (semi)early VOIP adopters are smart enough to suspect shenanigans

VOIP users = very small minority of the population. Smart people = also a very small minority of the population. The intersection of these groups is another order of magnitude smaller than the population of either group alone. Small enough, to where that group doesn't present any kind of real threat to Comcast.

- and change ISPs -

To who, exactly? If you think Comcast is bad, try dealing with Verizon or SBC. At least Comcast owns their own network and doesn't bounce the blame for a problem from one place to another; they'll tell you flat out it's your fault. At least they don't waste your time.

and tell all their friends to avoid Comcast.

See above.

And hte last thing for cable broadband providers: If you filter VOIP, you can't be considered a common carrier. I mean you are actively looking at packets that pass through your network now. you could be sued for not filtering P2P, and tons of other shit.

Do you honestly think Comcast gives a flying turd about getting sued by its customers? The amount of money they can make by destroying the competition is much larger than anything they'd have to pay to settle a lawsuit, and the risk of a finding against them in a court of law is remote (as most people will bankrupt themselves long before a suit sees a courtroom, and a class action could take years, and will eventually be settled for an amount far less than the profit they will have realized by then.) As far as Comcast is concerned, their network, their rules; they'll continue to filter their network as they see fit (restricting general bandwidth for power users, filtering torrent traffic, fucking up VoIP etc.) until someone forces them to act otherwise. AFAIK the only entity that could do that would be the federal government, and Comcast and its executives donate far more to politicians' campaigns than you or I do.

Not saying it's right, but that's the way it is.

Re:Perhaps Comcast is just inadequate?

[XorNand]

FYI, SIP is only the signaling protocol. Voice traffic is carried via RTP and RTP ports are dynamically allocated. There is also already significant development underway to improve the security of both SIP and RTP. See SIPS (SIP Secure).

Re:Perhaps Comcast is just inadequate?

[foxwizard]

I've been on Comcast broadband for a few months, having dumped BellSouth because of their restrictions on my access - I couldn't even reach my own webserver, which is housed at a commercial site in another state. I also dumped their phone service because, even after a year, they wouldn't give me access to my long distance carrier without my paying BellSouth a deposit! So, when I got Comcast, I got Vonage, and haven't had any problems with it . Needless to say, if I do, I'll just dump Vonage and stick with my cell phones. Comcast will get nothing out of blocking my VOIP, except a disgruntled customer who will be looking for ways to get to the internet without them. What these old line companies like BellSouth and Comcast don't seem to realize is that there are plenty of alternatives, and if they keep pissing their customer base off, folks will leave.

Actually...

[Xystance]

The last few days I've been having real problems with OUTGOING Vonage calls, but incoming Vonage calls have been ok.

Outgoing calls are extremely choppy and cutout in the middle of words, but I can hear the other person without a problem.

Comcast blocking doesn't surprise me...

[harshmanrob]

Comcast and its sibling company Road Runner routinely block access to alternative websites such as www.infowars.com and www.rbnlive.com because they take on the Feds and the "yes-man" major media. Time Warner (the owner of both Comcast and Road Runner) is a "yes-man" major media company, towing the neo-con line.

It is does not surprise me they would block access to their competitors. Soon I expect them to begin survelliance of their customers and reporting their "un-American" activities to the alphabet agencies.

Libertarians and tollroads

[BadAnalogyGuy]

Penn Jillette, in one of his books, wrote about how his ideal society would have all roads privately owned and managed. You'd pay as you went rather than paying for the road as part of your taxes. Those who used the road the most paid the most in tolls.

However, such a situation generally assumes that road operators would be willing to build roads out to remote areas where only a handful of customers would ever drive. It also assumes that these so-called "liberated" road owners would be unprejudiced individuals who weren't concerned about the any color but green. Unfortunately, both of these are just about impossible in the real world. You'll always have that last mile unpaved, and you'll always have owners who don't like a certain type of customer.

The solution is to mandate that the roads be publicly accessible, and if the owners are not willing to do so, that the government own the roads outright.

Blocking specific packets is not the role of the road owner, and if it ends up that such is the case, then that owner should be put out of business.

Not enough upload

[DrRobert]

I had Comcast and Vonage. Comcast's lower lever service has a limited upload cap which is not quite enough to get consistently clear calls, especially if you are doing anything else with the computer at the same time. It is not clear that this is a problem because they don't talk about upload bandwidth on the Vonage box, only total bandwidth, which Comcast technically meets. I cancelled Vonage after a couple of months, when I encountered almost comical ass-ness from the Vonage customer support. Those guys are complete bastards.

Business move?

[Dimentox]

Comcast probably did this blocking to sell their own service.

They could justify the block with this part of their TOS.
http://www.comcast.net/terms/use.jsp

"You shall ensure that your use of the Service does not restrict, inhibit, interfere with, or degrade any other user's use of the Service, nor represent (in the sole judgment of Comcast) an overly large burden on the network. In addition, you shall ensure that your use of the Service does not restrict, inhibit, interfere with, disrupt, degrade, or impede Comcast's ability to deliver and provide the Service and monitor the Service, backbone, network nodes, and/or other network services."

I have worked for ISP's where if someone is using to much bandwith we cut their connection. Most of the times ISP's oversell their network and hope that people dont use it up.

But i belive in this case this was just a shot to sell their own service, the main question is since its their network are they really ALLOWED to do this?

Re:Business move?

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

But i belive in this case this was just a shot to sell their own service, the main question is since its their network are they really ALLOWED to do this?

Sure, just as soon as they give up all their lines using publicly owned right of ways and are willing to no longer be protected from legal action for all the copyrighted material and kiddie porn they republish from router to router. That is to say, when they are no a government mandated local monopoly with special protections and privileges they can stop upholding the responsibilities of a common carrier that requires that treat everyone on their network, including services they offer themselves, equally.

Comcast Generally Sucks

[xrecruit]

I have been working with one of their local spot advertising reps, and was informed that "They may not be willing to work with me, because I have a competing product." Its too bad this kind of thing is even legal--From an economic standpoint, competition benefits consumers. Their rep has been shady, she said a 30-second spot (with my parameters) costs $3,000 to produce, but when I spoke to the producer, he laughed and said at most $500, and sometimes they do the first one for free. When I ask the rep questions over e-mail, she says "Call me on this one." Obviously she wants to go off the record... All in all, its really shitty dealing with them. My product is local, and they are the best tool to reach my audience--so I really need them, but I have been looking into other avenues, including local broadcast advertising...

Doing a better job carrying Vonage bits?

[magefile]

Why should Vonage get special treatment? After all, it's not like Comcast does a decent job carrying *anybody's* bits.

Comcast history

[MrNougat]

When I moved into a new house six years ago, we had AT&T cable. We got a flyer on the door about broadband internet. I called them up. "Sorry, it's not available in your area yet." I asked when it would be available. "Twelve to twenty-four months."

Twelve months later, I called back. "Not available in your area." When? "Twelve to twenty-four months." But that's what you said last time. "Sorry, my hands are superglued to the laminated 'lame answer' card."

Another twelve months, another call, same lame answer.

Then Comcast took over, all over Chicagoland. They started upgrading infrastructure immediately to support internet. They improved cable TV service. They started offering video on demand, with many shows for free (I don't know how I could get through a day without free kids' shows whenever I want). They started offering digital phone service. Now I find out they're going to offer VoIP.

I have been a satisfied Comcast subscriber since they took over from AT&T. I know cable companies get a bad rap, and I know many deserve it. But Comcast's past history, at least around Chicago, has been great.

Just so you know.

Not Surprising

[RebrandSoftware]

I've been fighting comcast's and other ISP's blocked ports for a few years now:

http://rebrandsoftware.com/portblocking.asp

Check out the visitor-submitted "Complaint List by ISP" at the bottom of the page, Comcast has the longest list of all.

Sympatico rewrites SIP headers

[wrook]

I was surprised to find out that Bell Sympatico rewrites all the headers in SIP messages as it goes through. I only discovered this because in certain circumstances it does it wrong and it caused the softphone I'm working on not to work.

I'm sure this is the start of some traffic shaping experiments for VOIP on that network. Whether they have started degrading service yet I couldn't say, though.

Very worrying...

just one data point

[marvinglenn]

For what it's worth... I have a customer (of my support business) on Comcast connected to me via a VPN who I sometimes call on a SIP phone over that VPN connection, and I haven't had a problem yet. I have the phone codecs set to G723, which has a bandwidth of 6.3kbs (or 5.3kbs selectable).

Just one little data point.

Argh

[serenarae]

A. They don't block ports
B. Your signal levels coming into your house are probably bad, or you have a bad split in the house somewhere. Keep in mind, every time you split that coax that your signal gets cut in half depending on what type of splitter you put on the line
C. From what I understand, their VOIP service isn't like vonage, and it runs over their private network
D. If you have an issue, don't complain about it here. Call them and tell them exactly what's happening. I let my lower channels stay fuzzy for three years without calling, blaming it on them. They came out an reran the line to my house and I haven't had any issues with cable or net since.