TechSpot

FCC asked to stop ISP traffic 'throttling'

By jobeard
Nov 19, 2007
  1. November 16, 2007 (IDG News Service) -- WASHINGTON -- A distributor of online video content has filed a complaint with the U.S. Federal Communications Commission, asking the agency to stop broadband providers from blocking or slowing peer-to-peer traffic.
    ...

    "They say that they're engaging in reasonable network management, but what they're doing is slowing down some traffic,"

    By blocking or slowing video and other Web content, Internet service providers are fighting against customer demand for more multimedia services

    details are here
     
  2. tipstir

    tipstir TS Ambassador Posts: 4,712   +89

    Who's managing this stuff? This is crazy!
     
  3. jobeard

    jobeard TS Ambassador Topic Starter Posts: 13,469   +327

    :) yes and no.

    For us that have come from a commercial world with dedicated T1, we're accustomed
    to full T1 bandwidth and unlimited services. These practices appear draconian
    and heavy handed.

    However, T1 dedicated lines are very expensive (compared to run of the mill
    personal ISP rates). The population of home users to T1 commercial is now
    amazing and comprise the major portion of internet traffic. To keep our
    subscription rates low, the ISPs have gone to ADSL (Asymmetric Digital
    Subscriber Lines) and QoS (Quality of Service) techniques to balance the workloads (ie throttling).

    I'm currently paying for a 1500kbs access (but getting as high as 4600!).
    Clearly the ISP is not throttling access (at least 100% of the time).

    BTW: Did you know that Congress authorized funding for the internet with the
    assumption of uniform/symmetrical up/down load speeds? It didn't happen that way did it!

    To my thinking, we would have almost no availability or reliability if the existing ISPs
    did not use these practices, as both of these are frequently marginal today.
    Can you imagine the outcome of full T1 rate access for everyone; sheez; the
    Net would be a disaster (imo). The only way to get a nominal service would
    then be to force everyone into T1 access and monthly billings easily exceeding
    $100(usd)/month and an installation fee ~$400.

    Be careful of what you ask for; the consequences may not be obvious!
     
  4. jobeard

    jobeard TS Ambassador Topic Starter Posts: 13,469   +327

  5. Cinders

    Cinders TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 1,313   +12

    You funny T1 guys!

    Many years ago I was in game, and I heard this guy bragging (I'm not saying you're bragging) about his T1 service. He said he was getting 1.5MBs up and down and that nobody could catch him. He decided to run around the building we were all gathered around to prove how fast he was. I anticipated his move so as he took his first step I gave chase. I was two or three steps behind him at the start and by the time we finished I had gained a step on him. He was obviously embarrassed and the first thing he said was WTF!!!. He then started to call me a noob and other various childish names. If you’ve ever been a member of an online gaming community then you have a good idea of the type of things he said. I ignored him and went back to the spot I was peddling my wares from.


    At the time I had Time Warner cable at 285KB up and 3.5MB down. Comcast took over operations from Time Warner in my area just a few months ago. Now I get 12-13MB down and 2MB up. The speeds for cable have really changed. If you’re still paying $100.00 a month for internet access I’d look around for something different. I pay $120.00-130.00 and get TV programming, phone service and very good internet speeds.
     
  6. jobeard

    jobeard TS Ambassador Topic Starter Posts: 13,469   +327

    Sorry you thought I might be bragging -- I wasn't and that's not the point intended.

    Having been in software development for 37 years, I bring a body of experience that
    is much different than a great many current users (and I'm still not bragging)
    which provides a rich background of experience and history into play.

    I only attempted to share that background and insight to help others with their perceptions
    and expectations. What they do with the information is up to them
    and I'm not offended by being ignored or contradicted :)
     
  7. Cinders

    Cinders TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 1,313   +12

    No no, I understand you weren’t bragging. I was OT in my first reply, but I just wanted to tell you that you might be able to save a bit of money on your internet connection and still be happy with it is all. I do get your first reply and think you have a good point. What I choose to do with my bandwidth is my responsibility and my ISP shouldn't care what I do as long as I don't break the law. I did swing you into the bragging group with "You funny T1 guys" so you do have my apology, but I didn't mean it like that. I just meant that a T1 line is a very old expensive technology. The "funny" part being that you’re still a member of the group despite the cost.
     
  8. jobeard

    jobeard TS Ambassador Topic Starter Posts: 13,469   +327

    not funny at all when there are ZERO alternatives :)

    When I gave up on Earthlink dial-up (very good support by the way), I told them
    I wanted to say with them and would have elected them as an ISP if the
    DSL access from my house would have worked :( too far for hs-DSL access!

    So it's TWC, dial-up or nada.
     
  9. bradthegreat

    bradthegreat TS Rookie Posts: 141

    My biggest concern is this: once you give ISPs the right to throttle 'video content,' how far can they take it? Why wouldn't they be allowed the then start throttling other types of content, like that generated from particular websites with which they have a dislike for? How long before ISPs are the backbone of the beginning of censoring on the Internet? Anything with a condemning message is blocked or throttled way down making it practically impossible to access.

    I know, this a bit extreme, but I don't think it is right for ISPs to throttle anything, no matter what. Subscribers should get what they pay for, no more, no less. If someone wants to spend the $$ on a T1, they should get all that they paid for; if someone goes for 128k DSL, they should get what they pay for. I don't understand why this is so complicated...
     
  10. jobeard

    jobeard TS Ambassador Topic Starter Posts: 13,469   +327

    Brad:
    once you give ISPs the right to throttle 'video content,' how far can they take it? ..
    Subscribers should get what they pay for, no more, no less. ​

    This is exactly the argument. However, to implement 'get what you pay for' requires
    throttling -- it is reasonable to ignore the content types and apply to all data.
    Almost everyone would accept that position -- except the gaming and video content providers :)
     
Topic Status:
Not open for further replies.


Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...


Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.