Comcast Realizes Blocking By Protocol Is A Problem; Asks BitTorrent For Some Help
from the took-'em-long-enough dept
Well, well, well. After stubborn silence, non-denial denials, and (finally) a "but we have to!" defense, combined lawsuits and FCC threats, it appears Comcast has realized that its traffic shaping efforts have turned into something of a "rootkit moment." In an announcement this morning, the company has teamed up with BitTorrent Inc. (the company, not the wider protocol itself) in order to come up with "protocol agnostic" ways to manage its traffic. It's not giving up on traffic shaping -- but it will be based on overall bandwidth use, rather than what applications you're using. Lotus Notes users rejoice.Of course, announcements, by themselves, mean nothing. Let's wait and see what sort of systems Comcast actually puts in place before we judge whether the end result is better or not. Though, it does confirm what we noted recently: this really is a problem that can be solved by technology -- which Comcast just didn't want to implement. Comcast's unwillingness to come up with a more reasonable technology solution earlier (while Verizon and others have been exploring them) is its own fault. In the meantime, it will be interesting to see if this has any impact on the lawsuits and the FCC investigation. Other than that, let's see what Comcast actually does (and how upfront they are about it) before saying this is a full win. In the meantime, just getting Comcast to budge a little has to be seen as a short-term victory.
![Hide This Hide this](https://ii.techdirt.com/s/t/i/topclose.png)
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: bittorrent, net neutrality, protocol agnostic, traffic shaping
Companies: bittorrent, comcast
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Whatever it is, they should disclose what they are doing so that the consumer can make an informed choice (if they even have a choice). If you prioritize VOIP traffic, that is fine, just let us know. There may be a few crazies out there that will dump their Comcast service if they knew what was going on, but I doubt it would really have an impact on the bottom line.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Comcast isn't doing it everywhere. My packets have never been reset ether but my max download speed has been cut to 1/6th of what it was (was 24Mb down now it's 4Mb down).
"you prioritize VOIP traffic, that is fine, just let us know"
They don't want to say that because they only prioritise theirs. Vonage, VoiceWing, Skipe users be damned.
"but I doubt it would really have an impact on the bottom line."
Not much negative, I'd guess mostly positive. They would be the first ISP to be honest with their clients. But, if they decide to cut my Internet speeds down and packet shape my ports I better see a reduction in price to match my reduction in service.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
i would run over my grandmother with a garden weasel for 4mb up. are you reading this insight broadband?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
good news?
If this proves out, I will finally get rid of my home phone!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
talk vs action
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
NY Times - Comcast to Stop Hampering File-Sharing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let Them Do What They Want
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The moment that someone who is paying the extra for a 16mbps connection is constantly limited to speeds less than the 6mbps (the cheaper connection) connection, Comcast will end up facing lawsuits
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So if the network can handle 500 users downloading at 10Mbs at the same time. (The download speed cap will be considered 10Mbs for this example.) If there are 1000 users all downloading at the same time the max speed any user can use during that time would be 5Mbs. For any one using VOip they would get 5-10% more bandwidth to use during that time than other users. Any emergency services would be given the max bandwidth of 10Mbs at all times.
Using a file sharing protocol to share within the providers network should have the cap removed for those transmissions up to the point that it starts to limit transmissions into and out of the providers hub. This will allow for faster transmissions less bandwidth going between providers and less network time being used keeping the network from having a high load for as long of a time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sean Henry
Now if the OC192 only had 1000 customers connected to it, the cable company would have to charge each customer $1000.00 per month to break even. So to make a profit from it, that would cover all their costs, they are going to need to charge each customer at least $1100.00 per month. Are you willing to pay that much per month Sean Henry to guarantee you get your 10mbps?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Sean Henry
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Sean Henry
1. If you have more than 1000 users on actively using all possible bandwidth then 100 more get on doing the same thing all will be scaled back 10%.
2. All users will not be on at the same time.
3. Most the time when on users are not actually transmitting just like my connection now as I type.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Troll Or Do You Really Think That We Have Choice?
Bill, um, I live in this boondocks called Silicon Valley, and I've been told that we are known, as a region, for those there Internets. Yet I have all of two choices for Broadband, Comcast or AT&T. In my last home in the area, DSL did not reach my house, leaving me one choice.
Whether it's one or two, I don't think that quite makes it a competitive market, where providers need relinquish market power, and be ruled by customer demand. Much on the contrary, my degree and training in what is called "Economics" suggested to me that a two-provider market could occasionally be considered an oligopoly. This becomes increasingly likely if there are significant barriers to entry for new competitors.
Those barriers to entry could be things like:
- there is significant capital expense preventing new companies from competing
- there are laws preventing entry (like municipal franchises, spectrum licenses, etc.)
- it is practically improbable to install a competing infrastructure (as in digging ditches along every street in a town for your copper, fiber, or cable).
- there is a powerful lobby from the incumbents giving them preferential treatment form government.
- the incumbents will drop their prices and undercut any new credible threat.
I'm not sure if any of those are ringing a bell with you or not, but to me it's starting to look a bit like the broadband market is not one rife with consumer choice.
No. I don't agree. We "vote with our dollars" the same way a Zimbabwean votes with their vote (and that country is dangling a long way under Chad.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Choice?!! I Wish!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
limiting by bandwidth, so now we wont get bandwidt
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Choice???
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How RED can solve congestion problems
Please read Nate Lawson's post on probability-based traffic shaping over at his blog. I think Nate has been mentioned on techdirt before, he created BD+.
How RED can solve congestion problems
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Technologcal Solution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is not a solution
http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/1485
[ link to this | view in chronology ]