Comcast throttling Bittorrent traffic

[mzkhadir]

TorrentFreak

if your company has Websense, this site is blocked.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

I use Comcast and haven't noticed this at all.

 

[Nik]

I use comcast and I have no problems seeding

 

[badkarma1399]

Can anyone provide a link of ISP's that use traffic shaping or some sort of bandwidth throttling?

 

[ScottFern]

thanks for bringing this to my attention!

 

[wheresmybacon]

Originally posted by: GuideBot
I use comcast and I have no problems seeding

 

[Tiamat]

I noticed this, but never thought of it much. Download speed hasn't suffered yet, but once the download is done, my upload goes from what I preset it to, to zero. I hope this is just the extent of it, but I don't need to keep an aggressive ratio like some other people who will be affected much more by this throttling.

 

[spidey07]

:thumbsup:

Smart move. They are eliminating the small percentage of people that use 90% of the networks capacity. This will enable better service to all customers.

Very smart.

 

[Eos]

Originally posted by: spidey07
:thumbsup:

Smart move. They are eliminating the small percentage of people that use 90% of the networks capacity. This will enable better service to all customers.

Very smart.

Proof of the bolded comment?

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: eos

Originally posted by: spidey07
:thumbsup:

Smart move. They are eliminating the small percentage of people that use 90% of the networks capacity. This will enable better service to all customers.

Very smart.

Proof of the bolded comment?

I'm not allowed to release information. But in general on broadband residential services 5% of the users use 90% of the capacity and it's almost always P2P.

 

[ppdes]

My previous ISP blocked port 6969...so you had to beg trackers to run on non-standard ports or keep digging up proxies, heh. You can change your own client's port at will, but the tracker you have no control over.

Comcast doesn't seem to be doing anything bad in my area, though, since they are what I use now and I'm doing 263 kB/s down and 100 kB/s up (my own limit) with no problems seeding.

 

[xeemzor]

Originally posted by: spidey07
:thumbsup:

Smart move. They are eliminating the small percentage of people that use 90% of the networks capacity. This will enable better service to all customers.

Very smart.

Yes, let's get rid of all users who use a service they pay for . Your logic is flawed, it's like banning trucking or delivery companies from operating on the roads, because they drive a lot more than other people.

 

[Nik]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: eos

Originally posted by: spidey07
:thumbsup:

Smart move. They are eliminating the small percentage of people that use 90% of the networks capacity. This will enable better service to all customers.

Very smart.

Proof of the bolded comment?

I'm not allowed to release information. But in general on broadband residential services 5% of the users use 90% of the capacity and it's almost always P2P.

So? They're paying for a level of service, why can't they use it.

That's like charging someone for the use of a water hose, saying that the hose is 1" in diameter and always turned on --and then cutting them off for leaving the hose on all the time. Who cares if they use it or not? Why penalize someone for using the level of service that you've offered them in the first place?

 

[Nocturnal]

Of course no company is sane enough to use BT to distribute updates or installation files... There's no real need for BT, you are all pirates!

 

[jersiq]

Originally posted by: GuideBot

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: eos

Originally posted by: spidey07
:thumbsup:

Smart move. They are eliminating the small percentage of people that use 90% of the networks capacity. This will enable better service to all customers.

Very smart.

Proof of the bolded comment?

I'm not allowed to release information. But in general on broadband residential services 5% of the users use 90% of the capacity and it's almost always P2P.

So? They're paying for a level of service, why can't they use it.

That's like charging someone for the use of a water hose, saying that the hose is 1" in diameter and always turned on --and then cutting them off for leaving the hose on all the time. Who cares if they use it or not? Why penalize someone for using the level of service that you've offered them in the first place?

Maybe because the other, larger percentage should also be allowed to use 90 % of that capacity also? They are paying customers also, are they not?

 

[xeemzor]

Originally posted by: Nocturnal
Of course no company is sane enough to use BT to distribute updates or installation files... There's no real need for BT, you are all pirates!

Dang, no more steam updates for me

 

[hanoverphist]

Originally posted by: GuideBot

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: eos

Originally posted by: spidey07
:thumbsup:

Smart move. They are eliminating the small percentage of people that use 90% of the networks capacity. This will enable better service to all customers.

Very smart.

Proof of the bolded comment?

I'm not allowed to release information. But in general on broadband residential services 5% of the users use 90% of the capacity and it's almost always P2P.

So? They're paying for a level of service, why can't they use it.

That's like charging someone for the use of a water hose, saying that the hose is 1" in diameter and always turned on --and then cutting them off for leaving the hose on all the time. Who cares if they use it or not? Why penalize someone for using the level of service that you've offered them in the first place?

because that hose being open wide all the time makes all the neighbors around him get 12psi less pressure in their house. why should his neighbors suffer lower quality service just so he can leave his hose on(download hentai pr0n or steal movies)?

 

[chuckywang]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: eos

Originally posted by: spidey07
:thumbsup:

Smart move. They are eliminating the small percentage of people that use 90% of the networks capacity. This will enable better service to all customers.

Very smart.

Proof of the bolded comment?

I'm not allowed to release information. But in general on broadband residential services 5% of the users use 90% of the capacity and it's almost always P2P.

Seems like you just did....

 

[chuckywang]

Originally posted by: Nocturnal
Of course no company is sane enough to use BT to distribute updates or installation files... There's no real need for BT, you are all pirates!

Linux distros?

 

[Dean]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: eos

Originally posted by: spidey07
:thumbsup:

Smart move. They are eliminating the small percentage of people that use 90% of the networks capacity. This will enable better service to all customers.

Very smart.

Proof of the bolded comment?

I'm not allowed to release information. But in general on broadband residential services 5% of the users use 90% of the capacity and it's almost always P2P.

If 5% of users are using up an ISP's entire network capacity, then that ISP has issues. Don't offer high bandwidth connections if you cannot support them.

I agree P2P is out of hand, but the company has a responsibility to have some redundancy.

 

[Praxis1452]

Originally posted by: hanoverphist

Originally posted by: GuideBot

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: eos

Originally posted by: spidey07
:thumbsup:

Smart move. They are eliminating the small percentage of people that use 90% of the networks capacity. This will enable better service to all customers.

Very smart.

Proof of the bolded comment?

I'm not allowed to release information. But in general on broadband residential services 5% of the users use 90% of the capacity and it's almost always P2P.

So? They're paying for a level of service, why can't they use it.

That's like charging someone for the use of a water hose, saying that the hose is 1" in diameter and always turned on --and then cutting them off for leaving the hose on all the time. Who cares if they use it or not? Why penalize someone for using the level of service that you've offered them in the first place?

because that hose being open wide all the time makes all the neighbors around him get 12psi less pressure in their house. why should his neighbors suffer lower quality service just so he can leave his hose on(download hentai pr0n or steal movies)?

Because he paid for it. It is not his fault for using what he paid for. He does not have to care about any of his neighbors. Each should worry about themselves. The direct blame is the company for offering a set service that they cannot deliver on or to everybody.

 

[Nocturnal]

Originally posted by: chuckywang

Originally posted by: Nocturnal
Of course no company is sane enough to use BT to distribute updates or installation files... There's no real need for BT, you are all pirates!

Linux distros?

No, nobody downloads Linux distros through BT. You're not a true Linux fanboy if you download it using BT!!!

</sarcasm>

 

[silverpig]

My home ISP uses traffic shaping as well, but it's really easy to get around. Just click the encryption option in your client and it works great. I don't know if this is the same kind of throttling, but you could try it.

 

[Nocturnal]

The ISPs oversell just like a hosting company will do. They truly should not oversell if they cannot provide the required bandwidth.

 

[Hacp]

So these companies want to have it both ways? They want to advertise unlimited bandwidth at x speeds, but then not actually provide the said bandwidth.