EFF proves Comcast is screwing with BitTorrent, releases instructions for testing your own ISP

Discuss

9 Responses to “EFF proves Comcast is screwing with BitTorrent, releases instructions for testing your own ISP”

  1. badone1 says:

    The Wireshark instructions are a good start, but a bit hard to use. Even a technologist would need some time to set it up. Could one of you open-source wizards create an easy-to-use tool for this.

  2. danegeld says:

    I agree with Greyhame above – most people want broadband over dial-up, and 8Mb/s over 2Mb/s etc. because of the responsiveness.

    The typical household wants pages that load quickly for the time that they use their web-browser / email, rather than to potentially transfer 8Mb/s of data 24/7, 365 days a year, which is what BitTorrent could attempt to do.

    The solution I’d prefer to see is a service that degrades based on total bandwidth transferred – serve up the first 1Gb a day at full rate, then progressively throttles back to something that the network could sustain 24/7, in order to prevent people who leave BitTorrent running from causing congestion.

    That keeps the neutrality aspect – only total bandwidth is counted – and protects the system against overload.

    The other thing that’s needed is to make it explicitly clear what is and is not permitted in the contract that comes with the Broadband service. Most firms sell “unlimited” bandwidth packages, even though that can’t really be the case.

  3. scott dewolfe says:

    I am a shaw user in Canada also. They seem to be shaping traffic by interrupting my internet connection for 5 seconds whenever my bandwidth usage is high (over 1Mps). The affect of this is that I lose any connections to anyone I am sharing data with and have to reestablish that connection. It slows file transfers to a crawl if they continue at all.

  4. Alys says:

    I’m pretty sure my ISP (Shaw cable in Canada) screws with Bittorrent too… it takes ages to download anything, and I have to reload the program when it slows to a tiny trickle.

    I suspect there are more ISPs than we know who control their Bittorrent traffic.

  5. teknocholer says:

    Bell Sympatico in Canada has been throttling torrents for a while now. This is the subject of much discussion here:

    http://www.dslreports.com/forum/sympat

  6. Dybbuk says:

    Utorrent uses encryption so you wont get throttled no mater who your provider is.

  7. Alys says:

    Which torrent client for Mac uses encryption?

  8. mandeville says:

    “Utorrent uses encryption so you wont get throttled no mater who your provider is.”

    Are you sure? I definitely noticed that uploads stopped a few months ago. Now the downloads are disabled for the most part. I can see plenty of seeders.

  9. greyhame says:

    Traffic shaping across consumer Internet service networks is absolutely happening, and for very good reason. The principal reason this is necessary is that most peer-to-peer applications will seek to fill all available capacity, essentially disregard network congestion, taking a fire-and-forget approach to sending data. It can overwhelm network infrastructure very easily.

    Consumer Internet service is NOT a tier one, committed information rate service. You can not expect to have your peak data rate available to you individually at all times. It falls to your network provider to determine which traffic gets priority, and which traffic does not, when there is contention for network resources. Since peer-to-peer traffic verges on abusive of network resources, disregarding inherent contention and congestion controls, it tends to be at the top of the list of traffic that gets dropped.

    All this fuss about spoofed packets is much ado about nothing. When an excessive number of flows is being generated by a particular application on a particular host, sending a TCP reset to flows that are not going to receive service is the most elegant way of terminating those flows. Face it, your 3000 BitTorrent connections are not always going to be served by your ISP, and resetting the ones that aren’t going to get served is simply being blunt about it, and frankly, it is doing you a favour.

    This whole tide of outrage about Comcast or Insert-ISP-Name-Here throttling peer-to-peer traffic is going to end in exactly one place. ISPs are going to have to spell out that if you want all of your traffic passed to and from your host at a certain data rate with no QoS or policing, you can pay full commercial rate for committed data rate services. Expect to pay $150/Mbps for that per month at the very least. If you want your $30, $40, $50 home Internet service your traffic is going to be shaped, full stop.

    This is NOT a net neutrality issue, this is a network management, and ISP marketing issue. The EFF needs to give their head a shake, and people need to lose their sense of entitlement to run abusive network applications across a consumer broadband service.

Leave a Reply