Slashdot Mirror
P2P Fans Pound Comcast In FCC Comments
Not Comcastic writes "Two weeks after officially opening proceedings on Comcast's BitTorrent throttling, angry users are bombarding the FCC with comments critical of the cable provider's practices. 'On numerous occasions, my access to legal BitTorrent files was cut off by Comcast,' a systems administrator based in Indianapolis wrote to the FCC shortly after the proceeding began. 'During this period, I managed to troubleshoot all other possible causes of this issue, and it was my conclusion (speaking as a competent IT administrator) that this could only be occurring due to direct action at the ISP (Comcast) level.' Another commenter writes 'I have experienced this throttling of bandwidth in sharing open-source software, e.g. Knoppix and Open Office. Also I see considerable differences in speed ftp sessions vs. html. They are obviously limiting speed in ftp as well.'"
Go to this page and put "07-52" into the "Proceeding" field.
Comments are in PDF form, so turn off "View in Browser" in Acrobat.
If ISP's didn't oversell bandwidth you would be paying $300/month for internet access.
Overselling isn't the problem. Way, way overselling is. Some things can be oversold without a problem, including bandwidth.
Gone!
I'm on Comcast, and I upload pictures to my photography website via SCP. The uploads get throttled after the first couple of MB. Encryption makes no difference to what they're doing. They don't need to know what's in the packets to decide whether or not to throttle them -- they can make that decision based on what's in the header.
Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
"these people are horribly incompetent and have horrible customer service"
Say what you will, but they are the ONLY ISP who didn't roll over and provide their customers info to the RIAA. Theyd
fought for their customers right of privacy to the Supreme court and PREVAILED.
In this day and age... that means something.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
That's false. There are numerous (Wireshark-confirmed) reports of RST injection happening on ANY TCP stream with a signficant amount of upstream bandwidth for more than a very short period of time.
For example, there's a well documented incident where Comcast's RST injection is killing Lotus Notes sessions where moderate sized (>1MB) attachments are sent.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
Were you not paying attention when Qwest actually stood up and refused because they read what the law says?
While I'm not a pro-comcast person or anything, what you're seeing is disclosed - it's the 'powerBoost' feature which gives you a bucket of really fast bits up/down stream, after which you throttle down to the speed you've purchased (8/1 or 6/384k or whatever).
So, I can get like 3mbit upstream for a bit, but then it scales back to 1mbit/sec. If I stop the transfer and wait a bit, then start again, I'll get the fast speed again for a little bit. Same is true on downstream - I'll get ~24mbit/sec down for a bit, then it'll throttle back to the 8mbit I pay for.
"let's compare national security, and rolling over to a government agency, as required by law"
The phone companies didn't have to turn over anything "as required by law". The government made a request, and all the others gave them what they wanted when it WASN'T required by law. It wasn't a legal demand, because the government didn't have the legal right. Qwest basically said "show us the warrant and you can have any of the information it specifies". Seeing there never was any warrants, nothing was turned over by Qwest.
"But this one goes to 11!"