AT&T: We don't throttle P2P traffic

AT&T on Friday denied using forged reset packets to interfere with network connections of Vuze file-sharing platform users, as Comcast has been accused of doing with BitTorrent traffic.

The statement came in response to a report released earlier this week (PDF) by Vuze, which offers a BitTorrent-based client primarily used for distributing video. The start-up has asked the Federal Communications Commission to impose regulations prohibiting broadband operators from blocking or degrading peer-to-peer traffic.

Vuze's report claimed to document the median reset rates experienced by more than 1,200 "autonomous system numbers," which are unique identifiers for individual IP networks and routers, as monitored using a plug-in Vuze began offering last month. (It tracks all possible network interruptions, not just ones related to the Vuze platform.)

According to Vuze's data, a number of Comcast connections recorded the most frequent interruptions, but the top 20 highest reset rates also included users with Cablevision, BellSouth (an AT&T property), and AOL subscriptions.

Vuze said it planned to ask those Internet service providers to be more transparent about the cause of those reset packets and disclose whether they are using a "false reset message" technique. Meanwhile, it filed its preliminary report with the FCC, acknowledging that its results weren't definitive and that the documented disruptions could have occurred for a multitude of reasons.

AT&T bit back on Friday, denying using "false reset messages" to manage its network and arguing that Vuze's measurements were "misleading."

Here's a snippet from the letter:

In response to your specific question about AT&T's network management practices, AT&T does not use "false reset messages" to manage its network. We agree with Vuze that the use of the Vuze Plug-In to measure network traffic has numerous limitations and deficiencies, and does not demonstrate whether any particular network providers or their customers are using TCP Reset messages for network management purposes. Given that Vuze itself has recognized these problems with the measurements generated by its Plug-In, we believe that Vuze should not have published these misleading measurements, nor filed them with the FCC. Moreover, as Vuze and others have acknowledged, TCP resets are generated for many reasons wholly unrelated to the network management practices of broadband network providers, which explains why resets may appear on networks of companies such as AT&T who do not use TCP resets for network management.

Vuze CEO Gilles BianRosa sent CNET News.com the following response to AT&T's letter on Friday afternoon:

"Our data suggests that the reset rates for Bell South, which is owned by AT&T, were higher than for many other ISPs. Our data collection was credible and transparent, but not conclusive. Therefore, we decided that it was best to simply ask AT&T and others if they use reset messages as a network management technique. AT&T has now answered that they do not. We appreciate their response and hope all network operators will be as forthcoming. It is easy to debate methodology, but, given the shortage of facts and the gravity of the issues to our user base, it is difficult to criticize the asking of a fair question--what network management practices are you using?"

Comcast, of course, has admitted to delaying "excessive" peer-to-peer file-sharing traffic at "peak hours" of network congestion in the name of keeping the network running smoothly for all its users. In a report last year, the Electronic Frontier Foundation said it had conducted tests confirming that the company was using forged reset packets to throttle certain BitTorrent and Gnutella sessions.

Under fire from consumer advocates and investigation by the FCC, the cable operator has since pledged to migrate to a "protocol agnostic" network management technique by the end of the year.

[ittesi259]

Vuze handling this the wrong way

Asking the question, what network management practices do you follow is a fair question to ask. But to do so AFTER filing studies with regulators is almost accusatory, and AT&T's issue with that filing is understandable. Also...why would you take this to the FCC while freely admitting these are non definitive and inconclusive numbers....I mean ***. Of course the FCC tells Congress they have no authority to enforce their principles and then tell Congress not to give it to em, so in the eyes of the FCC they may be conclusive....

Lets just hope AT&T doesn't end up looking like Rafael Palmiero in baseball saying "WE DO NOT USE TCP RESETS" and then get caught doing so.

[st430]

yes they are filtering.

yes, everyone is filtering.
Comcast use to filter too. but since the new broke that they are working with bittorrent, I think they stop that practice for now.
My p2p connect rate jump from 200-300bps for a few years to all of a suddent 800+ bps recently.
one time I even can get 1000+ while downloading multiple files.
my router /network cards are all the same during the time. If it's not the cable company or phone company...what else can you use to explain it?

[CaptainMooseInc]

AT&T U-verse...NOT filtered.

I have AT&T's U-Verse service. Not their Yahoo DSL. Same thing essentially though. I have the 10mbps/1.5mbps connection.

I purposely switched to it because Comcast started throttling BT traffic. I use uTorrent and have the ipconfig.sys file patched as you should. With this I get download speeds topping at around 1200kb/s and can upload at just shy of 200kb/s.

I'm getting top possible speed with no bandwidth limitations imposed from AT&T.

Next to Verizon's FiOS service, it's the BEST thing out there. Dedicated 10mbps/1.5mbps without having to worry about a phone call from "Network Management" saying your bandwidth usage is excessive.

Comcast griped and suspended me when I downloaded 1.3 terabytes of data and uploaded 600 gigabytes of data in one month.

Now with AT&T's U-Verse I can blow that figure out of the water (and have been for 6 months now). Not once have I gotten a phone call from AT&T or warning letter.

AT&T is awesome.

[cheshirkat]

And they don't...

...send your phone conversations to the NSA either!

[perfectblue97]

Could be

It could well be one of many things. For example improvements in traffic management, the expansion of the P2P network by users with high power connections of their own, improvements of he last mile cabling, upgrades to your local telecoms routers. Anything.

[qube99]

Vuze on ATT

I run Vuze on AT&T Broadband network on a Mac.

To see twhat's happening select About This Mac > More Info >
Logs and look at both system logs and console logs.

How many "TCP Blocking" error message do you get?

I get thousands on a continuous basis. Actual average speed is
20% of bandwidth and a small fraction of the average swarm
speed.

ATT isn't throttling? Then they use another name.

[Maelstorm]

AT&T DSL

I've had AT&T DSL since 1999, and I have to say that I'm quite pleased with it. They do not block or throttle any of my traffic that I have noticed. For the most part, I'm using it as a straight pipe to the internet since I have my own servers.

[Vegaman_Dan]

It's not filtering, it's technical difficulties

They have never filtered for P2P content. They simply have some unexplained network technical difficulties at the exact same time as said transfers are happening.

Purely coincidental.

Really.

[CaptainMooseInc]

Further proof...

I'm using a LEGIT program called Majestic 12 (www.majestic12.co.uk) which is a distributed computing project. You download a client and get a username. After installed your idle connection to the net is then used to crawl web pages to index into a search engine. This can require a MASSIVE amount of bandwidth. It just depends on how much bandwidth you dictate the program can use.

I allow it to utilize up to 100% of my total connection (10mbps/1.5mbps).

In 48 hours I have gobbled up almost 142GBs of downstream and 4GBs of upstream just from that program alone. That puts me on track for 2.2TBs of downstream and 124GBs of upstream in 31 days.

My upstream is rarely used with the program so I have uTorrent constantly uploading also. So do I think that AT&T is throttling?

No.

[perfectblue97]

Conflicted

While I can see the frustration of a P2P provider at having their services throttle, I can also see the point of view of the ISP in this.

Imagine if you' payed out a couple of million dollars on new network gear only to see the capacity that you were hoping o provide to your PAYING CUSTOMERS being chewed up by a P2P business that pays you nothing providing to customers who pay you nothing.

Personally, if I were an AT&T customer I'd be rather angry if my broadband started to crawl because my non AT&T neighbor was jamming up the local last mile downloading pirate movies. It'd want AT&T to throttle their traffic back to give me the bandwidth that I was paying for.

[bpogi]

I think it's highly suspicious that they have such a high reset rate if they don't practice this. I don't have Azureus installed at the moment, but I notice that regular HTTP downloads get throttled to 75 KB/s after about 15 seconds. I have an ~3.5 Mbps connection, which translates to over 430 KB/s, so it's clear they throttle.