This new 'service' Comcast is testing helps comcast identify its customers better which helps with the 250GB cap. The new DNS setup locks out hacked modems (unregistered modems) without spoofing as a legit modem. It also limits the speed cap from the cmts (node) end as well as the cable modem so no more uncapped 30megabit/s down and 10megabit/s up on a single modem without cloning a developer na modem.
The real conversation should not be about openDNS but how comcast is going out of its way to make sure it can identify which users are breaking the 250GB cap which ultimately forces many of the not so legit comcast users who like their anonymity to spoof as someone else on the same network and therefor ultimately putting blame on the wrong person when comcast issues an abuse suspend. It is ironic really.
It may sound like a completely separate subject but by comcast playing with its dns forwarding has much bigger back end changes that seem not related but in fact are.
If you want to convince your boss otherwise I would recommend comparing how much bandwidth users consume to traffic on the road aka driving.
When someone wants to drive from point A to point B it doesn't necessarily mean they will take up more space on the road regardless what speed they drive. In other words, if someone wants to download a 100MB file it will be 100MB regardless if it is at 2kB/s download or 2MB/s download.
The only thing that limits someone from driving all over the place all the time is time itself. If it takes 4 hours to get somewhere vs 4 minutes they will be far less inclined to do so. The comparable when it comes to the internet is steaming video and uploading.
Incorporating throttling will only piss valuable customers off and will not limit overall bandwidth usage.
If throttling is a 100% must I recommend limiting all consumers equally to keep response times high so grandma checking her recipes online may not notice that her max download rate has lowered but her grandson will notice his downloads possibly falling from say 500kB/s down to 400kB/s while the max download of the total pipelines are being hammered. I'd incorporate the same type of system for both download and upload as long as all users are limited EQUALLY. Ping times are far more important than they seem, but keeping consumer respect is as well. I think of it as juggling.
Also, keep in mind that the average power user's bandwidth today is a normal users bandwidth tomorrow. If anything, upgrading the pipes ensures a strong future and throttling is nothing more than a quick solution with bad consequences.
Slashdot Mirror
This new 'service' Comcast is testing helps comcast identify its customers better which helps with the 250GB cap. The new DNS setup locks out hacked modems (unregistered modems) without spoofing as a legit modem. It also limits the speed cap from the cmts (node) end as well as the cable modem so no more uncapped 30megabit/s down and 10megabit/s up on a single modem without cloning a developer na modem.
The real conversation should not be about openDNS but how comcast is going out of its way to make sure it can identify which users are breaking the 250GB cap which ultimately forces many of the not so legit comcast users who like their anonymity to spoof as someone else on the same network and therefor ultimately putting blame on the wrong person when comcast issues an abuse suspend. It is ironic really.
It may sound like a completely separate subject but by comcast playing with its dns forwarding has much bigger back end changes that seem not related but in fact are.
If you want to convince your boss otherwise I would recommend comparing how much bandwidth users consume to traffic on the road aka driving. When someone wants to drive from point A to point B it doesn't necessarily mean they will take up more space on the road regardless what speed they drive. In other words, if someone wants to download a 100MB file it will be 100MB regardless if it is at 2kB/s download or 2MB/s download. The only thing that limits someone from driving all over the place all the time is time itself. If it takes 4 hours to get somewhere vs 4 minutes they will be far less inclined to do so. The comparable when it comes to the internet is steaming video and uploading. Incorporating throttling will only piss valuable customers off and will not limit overall bandwidth usage. If throttling is a 100% must I recommend limiting all consumers equally to keep response times high so grandma checking her recipes online may not notice that her max download rate has lowered but her grandson will notice his downloads possibly falling from say 500kB/s down to 400kB/s while the max download of the total pipelines are being hammered. I'd incorporate the same type of system for both download and upload as long as all users are limited EQUALLY. Ping times are far more important than they seem, but keeping consumer respect is as well. I think of it as juggling. Also, keep in mind that the average power user's bandwidth today is a normal users bandwidth tomorrow. If anything, upgrading the pipes ensures a strong future and throttling is nothing more than a quick solution with bad consequences.