As in no false packet?

The problem with the FCC is it's hard to like them for more than a day. What they're doing with Comcast is correct, yet all the fines they dole out for "indecency" are over the top. Most of those fines come from complaints from old bags that sit at home all day and get angry when anything non-Jesus comes on their Matlock-box.

so when you use bittorrent they dont stop u? YAY

Comcast's response as to why packet shaping is necessary:
If a packet hits a pocket on a socket on a port
and the bus is interrupted as a very last resort,
and the address of the memory makes your floppy disk abort...
Then-the-socket-packet-pocket-has-an-error- to-report!

Wow, regulation actually can be good.

Since only some ISPs have resorted to bandwidth throttling, I do not know why their competitors have not used that to their advantage by promoting the limits the errant ISP competitors use on their customers who may be uninformed about that practice.

I make an effort to understand the policies and practices of my ISP and as a result I would never choose to go with Comcast or AT&T for Broadband due to their consistent heavy handed approach. The best way to dissuade those practices is to educate the masses to show their disapproval in the marketplace.

Just wait until the FCC finds out your using those P2P applications for porn...

Woooo!!! Rock on FCC!! I hate Comcast. My connection sucks thanks to their shoddy job in my area. Maybe this will help get them to make higher quality services.

@Mandatory_Field: Win.

Specifically, you win 3,682 internets.

When will this happen in Canada??? DAMN YOU SHAW... A "tech" there told me they don't throttle bandwidth b ut magically whenever my legit torrents are active, you know... new Linux distros ;) my bandwidth for even just regular browsing drops like a ton of bricks...

Unfortunately, it's still better than Telus for internet (they actually respond to those who "report" what you're downloading on torrents, Shaw doesn't care).

@Vagabum: You use two interesting words: "choose" and "marketplace." You lucky SOB. There are too many of us who live in an area where there's only one reasonable (ie. non-DSL crap rates, non-T1, non-Satellite latency) choice.

(BTW, LOL fuzzycuffs!)

I'm confused - isn't it Comcast's network and if so, don't they have the right to control the flow of data however they want? Or is the issue that the throttling wasn't stated in the contract?

Comcast is such a terribly bad company that it pains my soul (deeply) that they're in business doing as "well" (relatively) as they are. They're a frustrating example of a company that's in business and making money due to sheer size, influence, and monopolistic power. Ugh.

@twistah: Net Neutrality aka "Ethics" @ [en.wikipedia.org]

@twistah
Besides the whole "net neutrality" argument, Comcast offers tiered Internet services for different prices and different speeds. When they say I'm supposed to be getting 8 mbps for my money, it's not made clear (anywhere) that if I want to share my personal documents, that I created myself, via bittorrent that I would not be getting the speeds stated. Basically, their claim is that bittorent users take up the majority of their bandwidth and make up a very small portion of their user base, so they should limit them. This results in slower speeds for everybody else.

However, the opposing argument, besides net neutrality, is the user pays for access to their service at specified speeds (within reason), but does not get them. If I torrent 1 GB files once a month and don't touch torrents the rest of the week, it takes a LONG time to transfer since I'm capped at 40 KBps. If I did the same thing via ftp or http, I'd be getting many times faster rates. Basically, opponents say they should punish/limit those using the majority of the bandwidth, not the protocol they use, or not at all. Also, all this should be made crystal clear when advertising their "blazing fast speeds".

This couldn't happen soon enough. My cable provider just got bought out by comcast so they are taking over as my internet provider. I haven't noticed a slowdown yet, but I don't want to have to stop using p2p.

I'd also like to note that ever since my local Comcast implemented the throttling on bittorents, a lot of people in the area have been having connection and speed issues. I wouldn't be surprised at all if the system used to detect and throttle such a "massive amount of bittorent data" as Comcast calls it, even encrypted packets, is putting too much stress on their system. I work at a university and we used to limit the combined p2p traffic among all users until it was putting too much stress on that system causing the network to fail and we had to deactivate it. Nearly every Comcast user has ALL of their data going through *usually* a single or a few very expensive machine(s) to filter it. If Comcast really did try to offer the 8 mbps connections they advertised, they would need a machine to filter the traffic for about every 120 or so users (assuming theoretical gigabit speeds to the filters). Otherwise, it would put too much stress on the system and start dropping packets. My guess is with the cost of the filtering equipment, *maybe* one filter would be at a single site. It's just too much stress.

@Mandatory_Field:

I bow to you, sir.

So, the gov't allows the Cable companies to split the country up so that the consumer can't have a choice, then the gov't finds itself needing to step in when all that power goes to their heads. The hell?

@SuppleMonkey:

He didn't create that if that's what you are thinking. I first read that poem about 25 years ago in a computer users group newsletter. Here is the full poem. I don't know anyone who actually knows who wrote this but it wasn't Dr. Seuss that's just the title of it.

Although I do salute Mandatory_Field for using the poem in this situation.

Dr. Seuss Explains Computers
If a packet hits a pocket on a socket on a port,
and the bus is interrupted as a very last resort,
and the address of the memory makes your floppy disk abort,
then the socket packet pocket has an error to report.

If your cursor finds a menu item followed by a dash,
and the double-clicking icon puts your window in the trash,
and your data is corrupted 'cause the index doesn't hash,
then your situation's hopeless and your system's gonna crash.

If the label on the cable on the table at your house,
says the network is connected to the button on your mouse,
but your packets want to tunnel on another protocol,
that's repeatedly rejected by the printer down the hall,
and your screen is all distorted by the side effects of gauss,
so your icons in the window are as wavy as a souse,
them you might as well reboot it and go out with a bang,
'cause as sure as I'm a poet, your system's gonna hang.

When the copy of your floppy's getting sloppy on the disk,
and the micro code instructions cause unnecessary risk,
when you have to flash your memory and try to RAM your ROM,
quickly turn off the computer and be sure to call your mom.

@MacBandit: Thanks for digging up the original. Regardless, I hadn't heard it before so I found it entertaining.

More of a "Major-General's Song" feel to it than a "Dr. Suess" rhyme.

And to Comcast i leave.... a boot to the head.

@MacBandit: that was a str8 up lyrical assassination yo.

IN YOUR FACE COMCAST!

@MacBandit:

I can totally hear the Beastie Boys doing this as one of their raps. Take "Paul Revere" and just replace the lyrics with these!

@Vagabum et. al:

I've had Comcast for 3 years, and have been a very heavy users - NewsGroups, BitTorrent, Gaming, what have you - for that entire time. Never, not once, have I ever had my bandwidth throttled or shaped - and I live in a quite large city where the penetration of cable broadband from Comcast is VERY high.

I'm not denying that it happens, but I'd be curious to know why it happens to some areas of Comcast's users, and why not in other areas. Neither the AP or the EFF's testing looked at more than one area of the country.

The other thing that most people forget is that Comcast has inherited the majority of it's broadband network - very little was built by Comcast directly, and not all previous owners were good about keeping their networks in good shape, which could lead to capacity issues that can be resolved, but just not immediately (fiber doesn't roll out itself; CMTS's don't configure and deploy themselves).

Also Comcast has recently instituted a centralized Change Management system that requires Regional, Divisional, and Corporate approval for all major plant changes - and this takes time, as anyone who has ever used a Corporate purchasing/approval system can tell you.