[IP] Comcast opens up about how it manages traffic

[David Farber <dave@farber.net>]

________________________________________
From: Patrick W. Gilmore [patrick@ianai.net]
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 1:01 AM
To: David Farber; Henrik B
Cc: Patrick W. Gilmore
Subject: Re: [IP] Comcast opens up about how it manages traffic

Henrik,

Leaving all judgements of Comcast aside, I would like to comment one
thing you mention:

> My opinion is taht if Comcast sells me TCP/IP based Internet
> connectivity, then that is what they should give me. If they are
> overselling their capacity, which I'm certain that they are, then that
> should not be my problem, should it?

_EVERY_ network provider who sells you "TCP/IP based Internet
connectivity" is overselling their capacity.  There is no commercial
transit provider who could sustain the load of all their customers
bursting to max simultaneously.  As far as I know, there never has
been - at least not one that made money.

Or did you really think full transit went for $3.33/Mbps ($40/12 Mbps)?

--
TTFN,
patrick


On Apr 21, 2008, at 7:36 PM, David Farber wrote:

>
> ________________________________________
> From: Henrik B [blondino@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 5:27 PM
> To: David Farber
> Subject: Re: [IP] Comcast opens up about how it manages traffic
>
> Dear Dave,
>
> Maybe for IP if you think it's appropriate
>
> I find this whole discussion amusing and troubling at the same time.
> Comcast is continuously telling us through TV commercials that they
> give you 12 Mbit/s and brags about their PowerBoost that makes running
> to Peru and back a matter of fractions of a second. And then Mr
> Bowling defines an excessive usage as "the equvalent of two T-1
> lines". If I recall correctly a T-1 line has throughput of 1.544
> Mbit/s, which means that if you use 3 Mbit/s, or 25% of the capacity
> that Comcast says that you have, then you are an excessive user.
>
> My opinion is taht if Comcast sells me TCP/IP based Internet
> connectivity, then that is what they should give me. If they are
> overselling their capacity, which I'm certain that they are, then that
> should not be my problem, should it? If they have a problem defining
> the product they are selling, it's no wonder that they have a problem
> putting a price on it.
>
> In addition, I think USA Today journalists should check what a T-1
> line is, rather than just saying "big data lines used by large
> corporations."
>
> Henrik Brameus
>
> On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 8:28 AM, David Farber <dave@farber.net> wrote:
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Bob Rosenberg [bob.redmountain@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 5:18 AM
>> To: David Farber
>> Cc: Lauren Weinstein
>> Subject: USA TODAY: Comcast opens up about how it manages traffic
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> Perhaps for I.P.
>>
>> Bob Rosenberg
>>
>>
>>
>> Comcast opens up about how it manages traffic
>> By Leslie Cauley, USA TODAY
>> Managing online traffic can be risky stuff. Just ask Comcast.
>> http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/services/2008-04-20-comcast-peer-to-peer_N.htm
>>
>> The cable TV giant came under fire recently when it slowed a "peer-
>> to-peer" transmission of the King James Bible sent as a test by an
>> Associated Press reporter.
>>
>> At two special hearings held by the Federal Communications
>> Commission — one at Harvard and another last week at Stanford — the
>> company was excoriated for delaying peer-to-peer traffic.
>>
>> Peer-to-peer transmissions, which account for more than half of all
>> Web traffic, enable computers to snatch music, data and video files
>> from other computers. To assemble one file, a peer-to-peer service
>> can tap into dozens, or even hundreds, of computers around the world.
>>
>> Comcast (CMCSA)<http://stocks.usatoday.com/custom/usatoday-com/html-quote.asp?symb=cmcsa
>> >, which has 13 million online customers, has been taking a low
>> profile. Executives Tony Werner, Comcast's chief technology
>> officer, and Mitch Bowling, senior vice president of online
>> service, agreed to discuss the incident with USA TODAY.
>>
>> According to Werner, the transmission slowdown occurred
>> automatically when network congestion started to build in the
>> Boston area, affecting other customers. The King James
>> transmission, which was small, didn't cause the slowdown, he says.
>>
>> Once traffic loads got too high, he says, Comcast's network
>> automatically took steps to avoid further degradation. The result:
>> Some peer-to-peer traffic, including the AP transmission, got
>> delayed. But it was never blocked, he says. The transmission
>> "showed up. It just took a little longer to get there."
>>
>> "The only reason you do something like that is to maintain
>> consistent network performance," Werner says.
>>
>> At the FCC hearings, Comcast was criticized for throttling back
>> peer-to-peer traffic as a network management technique.
>>
>> "The technique is not unique to Comcast," says Comcast's Bowling.
>>
>> FCC Chairman Kevin Martin says Comcast should be specific about its
>> bandwidth limitations. "Consumers have to be informed about what
>> they are buying," he says.
>>
>> Comcast service contracts say "excessive usage" is banned, but no
>> cutoff point is specified. Bowling says there's a good reason for
>> that: "There isn't a specific limit."
>>
>> Bowling says Comcast considers incidents case-by-case. Only a
>> handful of people fall into the "excessive user" category, he says.
>>
>> Pressed to say how much bandwidth consumption is too much, Bowling
>> offers this: People who use "the equivalent of two T-1 lines" — big
>> data lines used by large corporations.
>>
>> "I don't think anybody could look at that as typical residential
>> usage," he says.
>>
>> -------------------------------------------
>>
>
>
>
> --
> "If you're right 98% of the time, why quibble about the remaining 3%?"
> MSN: hbrameus@hotmail.com
>
> -------------------------------------------
>


-------------------------------------------