Comcast Defends Its Traffic Shaping Efforts
from the on-the-warpath dept
Following the FCC's decision to investigate Comcast's traffic shaping efforts, the company has now responded in great detail to the investigation, but has done so in very questionable ways. While the company finally admits that its doing some traffic shaping (no, the minor change to its terms of service doesn't count), it's clearly gearing up to fight any allegation that it was wrong in its actions. As Broadband Reports notes, the company uses the word "reasonable" over 40 times. That's no surprise, since the FCC has said that it would allow "reasonable" network practices. It also uses some questionable metaphors for its actions suggesting that forging packets (oops, sorry, "resets") are perfectly normal activity, comparing it to a fax machine getting a busy signal. Of course, the difference there is that the fax machine at the other end is actually busy whereas in this situation Comcast gets to arbitrarily (and without any explanation or notice) tell you that the machine on the other end is busy, just because it says so. Even worse, unlike with the "busy signal" you're not actually informed. You just notice that things don't work.
Comcast also claims that it's not "blocking" anything and that the situation is no different than a traffic jam for a car trying to get on a highway, where "one would not claim that the car is 'blocked' or 'prevented' from entering the freeway. Rather, it is briefly delayed, then permitted onto the freeway in its turn while all other traffic is kept moving as expeditiously as possible." That sounds good, but again, is simply not related to reality. If you're waiting to get on the highway, you know what the situation is. You know how far you are from the highway and you can see how much traffic there is in front of you and how fast it's actually moving. In Comcast's case, you'd be driving towards the highway on a perfectly open road, and then suddenly, without reason or explanation, Comcast would have your car stop moving and pretend like nothing was wrong. That's a bit different.
Finally, there's this beautiful section where the company claims that the FCC shouldn't take any action because the blogs will keep it honest. Seriously. "The self-policing marketplace and blogosphere, combined with vigilant scrutiny from policymakers, provides an ample check on the reasonableness of such [network management] judgments." Uh huh. This would be the same blogosphere that was screaming about this for months, and which Comcast has totally ignored, denying and stonewalling its way through every attempt at getting some reasonable response.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
Comcast,
you suck.
Sincerely,
Blogosphere.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Comcast Defends Its Traffic Shaping Efforts
I think its about time for metered broadband. The "all you can eat" flat rate pricing model is showing its inherit weaknesses. We are no longer "average" page viewers. At this point, I'm sure the 80/20 rule applies here (80% of bandwidth used by 20% of users). With VOIP, torrents, video, etc the load will only increase. High quality bandwidth is no longer "too cheap to meter"
Note that I'm no "doomsdayer"...only that I recognize more efficient pricing schemes will benefit both producers and consumers of bandwidth.
I'm fully aware of your past opinion on flat rate pricing...have you given it a second thought?
Dave
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
So.. who in the broadband to home business gets it right?
ATT with DSL?
TimeWarner with Cable?
etc?
who does a better job than Comcast in the traffic shaping scheme of things?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Comcast Defends Its Traffic Shaping Efforts
The answer to the problem is not new pricing schemes and traffic shaping. The answer is more bandwidth. This problem is negated by such technologies like Fiber to the Home a al verizon FiOS...
For the record I think traffic shaping is a REALLY great thing. In its proper context, i.e. Traffic shaping belongs on the corporate network. Heck, I even do a little traffic shaping on my home network so I can keep the kids from killing the bandwidth and I can still do what I want.
But, traffic shaping has no place on the network I pay for... I pay for 8mbs bandwidth every month on time, no questions and I should be able to receive all of it, and be able to do with it as I please when I please.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Comcast has been marketing their product as "unlimited" for so long, and now to introduce constraint, let's face it, the product is no longer "unlimited".
If I was a company that built cars, and advertised my car to get 55 miles per gallon, full knowing that it only got 25 miles per gallon in EPA tests, there would be several regulatory agencies that would be interested in understanding the discrepancy.
I hate to be captain obvious, but the reality is that if business can't regulate itself, regulators can step in.
It may be a difficult concept to grasp, but I'll try to make it as simplify it a bit more-- You can't advertise a product one way and actually deliver another.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Comcast Defends Its Traffic Shaping Efforts
Comcast CAN provide unlimited traffic to ALL if its customers if it wishes to. They simply do not want to spend a few million of their billions on some additional networking architecture. There are NO weaknesses if they build it right. Metered broadband is the most asinine thing Ive heard of. If people were only going to use 1MB of data a day they would NOT be paying for a broadband internet connection. This would NOT benefit the customer as you say and would only benefit the ISP if they had any subscribers left when they started using metered usage. The problem is that Comcast is trying to sign up as many new customers they can while still using their old equipment unable to support all the users they are recruiting
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
To anonymous coward. Verizon FIOS gets it right. I have a connection at advertised speeds with NO traffic shaping or filtering
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
"...In Comcast's case, you'd be driving towards the highway on a perfectly open road, and then suddenly, without reason or explanation, Comcast would have your car stop moving and pretend like nothing was wrong."
Actually, you and your car would be returned to your driveway (since you'd probably have to re-start the file transfer...)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Comcast Defends Its Traffic Shaping Effort
Actually you pay for "Up to" 8mps of bandwidth. Legally they can throttle you all they want, you're just paying for potential.
-Beta
p.s. I think this is total crap, I think if you're paying for bandwidth you should be getting it.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Exactly right. Sending a "reset" is the same as putting your car back in the driveway, with the motor turned off.
And as for the lame "busy signal" analogy, I've never gotten a busy signal while in the middle of sending a FAX.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Comcast Defends Its Traffic Shaping Effort
I agree that Comcast is being deceitful using the "unlimited" language. However, I disagree with your opinion regarding metered broadband. Sending packets of data over fat pipes is not much different than delivering water, electricity or natural gas (or Amazon S3, or Picasaweb...)...all of which are metered. Metering is good because you don't pay for what you don't use.
Comcast's reshaping efforts are a clear signal that they are bandwidth constrained.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
comcast isn't getting my business
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Why oh WHY...
Does Comcast keep acting like a thesaurus will get them out of trouble?
Also if Comcast is trying to limit their traffic they need to improve the structure they have otherwise they'll lose revenue. They seem to think they're going to lose revenue if they improve the infrastructure. Probably short term thinking at its best.
Either way Comcast is going to be in a real bind if it doesn't stop acting like the problem they made will go away anytime soon, if at all.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Re: Comcast Defends Its Traffic Shaping Ef
Bandwidth constrained?
Check out Docsis 3.0 Better yet, sign up for this event:
http://www.lightreading.com/live/event_information.asp?survey_id=381
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
As if the term Comcastic needed more dirt smeared
Comcastic:“adj., behaving with insensitivity to and disregard for the interests of customers. Pass it on!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: As if the term Comcastic needed more dirt smea
not enough bandwith?
wasn't comcast gearing up to provide 100mb connection speeds for their On Demand HD movie service, so that you can download and view HD quality movies in a matter of a few minutes. pay per view style, straight from comcast.
thought i remembered reading an article about that here.
seems weird that 1 tube is getting clogged and needs to be shaped/manipulated, while this other tube is gonna be wide open for use with content that only comcast will provide for a price.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Packet Forging
IANAL, but can't packet forging be prosecuted as simple fraud? The packet doesn't come from where it claims to come from and reports an untruth. Maybe the FTC should get in on this rather than the FCC.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Uh huh... m'kay
Yeah, my DSL never has any problems like this, and guess what, it is cheaper than cable internet.... Hmmmm...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
I want Charter to do it too
I'm glad Comcast is doing this, and I hope my ISP (Charter) eventually will do it too. I too pay for high speed access; 5MB, but I'm lucky to get 1MB because of all the buttholes around me sucking up bandwidth with their stupid games and torrents.
The people crying about this are the bandwidth piggies whose butts I'd like to stick my boot up.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
car analogy - how lame
"no different than a traffic jam for a car trying to get on a highway,"
How many times must I tell you,
the internet is not a big truck
its a series of tubes
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
isn't this akin to censorship
would this not be akin to censorship? basically the company you purchase services from telling you how you can use it. does this mean that they will start blocking traffic from ABC or NBC video sites because they consider it to be a conflict of interest and start filtering or breaching RFC by placing a RST packet into the stream ?
we need more competition in the broadband arena. Right now I'm stuck with Comcast when Fios becomes available be sure I'll jump ship
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: I want Charter to do it too
Let me get this straight....
You are paying for a service, that service is not being delivered, and instead of blaming the provider of that service you blame other users ?
If the power goes out do you blame a random person down the street just because they also use electricity, or do you blame the power company ?
If the water stops running do you yell at the person at the McDonald's drive through or do you call the water department ?
I could go on but you get the point, get a clue dude.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: I want Charter to do it too
"I'm lucky to get 1MB because of all the buttholes around me sucking up bandwidth with their stupid games and torrents."
you mean you blame all those other people, who also paid (same as you) for high speed access; 5MB? the same people who ALSO are lucky to get 1 MB because comcast over-sold their own system?
Think of a cake, a tasty internet cake. Everyone gets the share they pay for. Oops, looks like Comcast took in money for 100 pieces of cake, but only made enough to give 10 people the slices they paid for.
hmm.. Comcast can:
1)spend some of its massive profits to increase bandwidth, ie, make more cakes.
2)Randomly decide anyone who is going to eat the full slice (bandwidth) is a cake hog and take it away.
3)Pass out a fake cake to some people (heavy handed "shaping") and make the rest of the cake last by cutting all the slices into crumbs(people getting fractions of their "up-to" amounts due to oversells).
Ideally, the answer is option 1. they make more cake, and then, golly, they can Sell even more cake! more money! And everyone has the cake they paid for!
But it seems providers would rather play around with options 2 and 3, which are marginally cheaper in the short timeline (massivly more expensive long-run, due to people giving up on cake and switching to pie) and, oops, horrible for the consumers.
Tada. tek'as "Cake" Metaphor For Internet Service Providers.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: isn't this akin to censorship
Yeah, and it also would not be an issue with a net neutrality bill.
Comcast also has a few issues with that whole "Being a monopoly" thing.
They need to open their cable TV/cable internet network to other companies. You know, because they are the only ones allowed to use it, and often own the ONLY lines in a city (ex. Denver).
Doesn't that make it... you know... a cable monopoly?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Comcast Defends Its Traffic Shaping Efforts
WTF are you crazy? How would you like to get a bill at the end of the month, that says you used xxxxxxx bandwidth, Here is your bill, $5,684. Because thats the way it is, Check AT&T burstable lines. Now Pay up or be disconected. I say this because the "metered bandwidth" business model has already been estalished by the telcoms. And they are just waiting for the day you have to pay out per kb.. Hey wait a min, you sound like a telcom.. The bottom line here is That its illegal (or should be) to mess with peoples unlimited bandwidth in the mannor that they did..
I mean think about it what if some gamer, who works for your telcom limits your bandwidth, because you and him happen to be neighbors..
Keep it moving FAST and free of obstruction.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Hey Mike
Mike, can you please send your analysis to the FCC.
In this case I believe it will help them make an informed decision.
But I feel that the responders here had a more accurate description of the car getting onto freeway.
It is more like you randomly appear back in your driveway.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Re: Comcast Defends Its Traffic Shaping Ef
"I think this is total crap, I think if you're paying for bandwidth you should be getting it."
Right. if they want to change the way they're selling this stuff that's one thing, but if I'm told 8mbs, I expect 8mbs. If you're only going to give me 5, say so.
I sometimes feel this treads the line of false advertising.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
while i understand the benefits of traffic shaping
Comcast is NOT shaping traffic. True Traffic shaping would buffer the traffic and send it at a steady (albeit slower) rate than the typical burstiness of TCP traffic. Comcast is deliberately killing traffic that their customers are paying for. If they think their customers are committing fraud they should call the FBI. I think comcast customers should call their local AG's and have comcast prosecuted for consumer fraud.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Traffic Shaping
How about British Telecom's model for shaping? Tiered pricing with caps during peak hours? If you utilize N Gigs off of peak hours ... it doesn't count towards your cap.
Oh, and as to shaping, shape/slow non-interactive (P2P/ftp) during peak hours only.
Paletable in light of no instantaneous additional bandwidth from a company?
I'm not saying it's perfect, what I'm saying is ... why isn't Comcast doing that? I know it's hard, but it doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. It saves Comcast transit dollars, since they only pay based on peak usage.
Yes it would require interfaces for customers to see and track their usage, but I would think that would be a good thing. Good for the knowledgeable types and good for the unknowingly compromised.
I'm crazy ... I know. I'll shut up now.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Comcast Defends Its Traffic Shaping Effort
No need for sour language...
I am not crazy. Why would my metered bill be over $5k? What incentive would Comcast have to charge that. That is crazy.
I have an Amazon S3 account. The pricing is as follows:
Storage
$0.15 per GB-Month of storage used
Data Transfer
$0.10 per GB - all data transfer in
$0.18 per GB - first 10 TB / month data transfer out
$0.16 per GB - next 40 TB / month data transfer out
$0.13 per GB - data transfer out / month over 50 TB
See http://www.amazon.com/gp/browse.html?node=16427261 for details
My monthly bill is around $4.00. I find this very reasonable for the amount of capacity I utilize.
If comcast charged me $0.10 for data transferred in (to my home), it'd take 500GB/month to reach $50/month
Now, I'm sure there would be an additional flat fee for the connection and speed tier, but it should not be more that an additional $10.00 per month. That takes me down to 400GB/month for $50.00
...and no, I do not work for a telco or cable co.
I'm open to discussion....but please don't resort to name calling.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Re: Comcast Defends Its Traffic Shaping Ef
The trouble is that the providers have a strong incentive to charge you whatever they can get; it's called revenue. Now, perhaps your 400/GB for $50 is reasonable, though it does assume that the access fee, tier rate, taxes, and anything else the care to tack on is $10 or less. If it costs them, say, $15 a month for your traffic and they charge you $50, they make $35 off you. If they charge you $75, then they're making $60 off you. If they can get you to pay $100 a month, then their margins look even better.
The question also becomes, what does 400GB represent? How much do you actually do online? Emails? News forums? Web comics? Video games? buying and downloading music, movies, software? How much is Windows Update or a Norton update going to cost you? How about charging you for all the adds that show up on Google or Yahoo? or the spam emails you download with all your legitimate mail?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Comcast and consumer fraud
I firmly believe that Comcast is guilty of massive consumer fraud. Their mumbo jumbo customer service answers and excuses do not address the fact that their are billing me for something that does not work.
In addition, here in the Nashville area, they are the only wheel in town. They are somehow in collusion with the band of crooks we have in the Tennessee State Legislature, and between the two organizations Comcast has managed to laugh at anti-trust and anti-monopoly laws.
I will gladly document my unpleasant experiences with this massive fraud and join onto any class action suit that ensues.
Sincerely,
Merrill Jackson
Nashville, Tennessee
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Comcast speeds suck donkey schlong!
I used to have patmedia b4 and I used get 1.3 megs down to 400 k down.. now since comecast has taken over.. my speed have fallen to 35k -- and falling...? like wtf? I called tech support.. they see nothing as usual.. having a tech clown to see if this issue.. I've run speed test on the www.patmedia.net website and comes close to 10 megs down and 2.5 megs up speeds.. then I download like something from eith megaupload or cnet.com.. starts and 800k down all the way down to 35k down.. wtf comcast.. any one can tell me what is going on?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Comcast seriously need some competition
My neighborhood has only comcast offerring broadband services starting at $60. Right across the street where cox and qwest competes there are plans starting at $20 for the same bandwidth comcast offers...MONOPOLY anyone?
And the traffic shaping really is truly getting ridiculous. Limiting to like 200kb on a supposebly 6mbps service is fine with me, but I'm getting ~35kb on p2p downloads! I can get a good 10kb/sec with my old dial up company!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Re: Comcast Defends Its Traffic Shaping Effort
Actually we're supposed to be getting unlimited access at speeds 'up to' 8mbps. Stopping my connection every few seconds is by no means unlimited.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment