Comments on: AT&T: We don't throttle P2P traffic

In response to questions raised by BitTorrent-based client Vuze, phone company denies using forged reset packets to disrupt peer-to-peer file sharing traffic on its network.

[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?

[Leria]

I've noticed a jump as well

I have Comcast cable internet as well, and I have noticed a jump in rates as well. From 500KBps on some single downloads and multiple downloads to 1000KBS on single and multiple downloads.

I don't think Comcast is filtering anymore when you are seeding either. Some things that I thought would take me 1/2 day to seed after downloading to get to the .500 I seed to on most downloads, took only 1 or 2 hours.

[etunnels]

VPNs Will Counteract ISPs

Do people realize that using a VPN will defeat any of these ISP measures. The VPN tunnels through the ISP on port 1194, thus defeating port blocking. And the ISP can't sniff your packets because they're enclosed in an encrypted tunnel.

[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.

[Leria]

Comcast suspended you?

Hell, I've gotten those calls from them before and guess what? When I asked to speak to a supervisor..... they hung up. I called back, reported the phone calls.... the people who did them were fired, because they did NOT have permission to call people without permission from supervisors, which they were not getting.

I download anywhere from 10-500GB's a month, and haven't heard jack from Comcast since those phone calls where I got the people fired who made them.

[Get_Bent]

If the shoe fits....

1.9 terabytes of data transfer in a month averages out to over 42 megs per minute FOR THE ENTIRE MONTH. I'm not surprised that Comcast gave you the boot. With that level of bandwidth consumption, you SHOULD pay extra for your Internet service.

[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.

[howyoudoin956]

ATT doesn't throttle me

I'm also a mac user and use Vuze all the time. I have Uverse
from ATT 6mbs connection and I usually max the connection all
the time with Vuze (of course it varies based on how many
seeders etc).

I probably do close to 500gb a month without any issues and
upload quite a bit too.

I've had ATT for about 5 years now and just jumped to Uverse
and always like their service and reliability.

Sounds the TCP blocking your getting might be something local

[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.

[Imalittleteapot]

But

How to do you know they're downloading illegal material and not Ubuntu without violating their privacy? I don't pirate, but this is my POV because sometimes I do use Bittorrent sometimes. Just not to break the law. It does have legal uses.

Do pirates get free Internet now? I wasn't aware of that. You say P2P users provide nothing? I'm sorry I pay my monthly bandwidth bill. My bandwidth package is unlimited which means I can download as much as I want. Guess what? The other P2P users pay their monthly bandwidth as well. If they didn't they couldn't get online.

Am I supposed to pay your ISP and mine? I'm sorry. I made a deal with my ISP that if I paid them a single fee I could connect to users on your ISP as much as I want without paying a separate fee. My ISP promised to take care of all those issues. That was simply part of my deal. Had they not promised that I would have went with another company that did. They knew that so they made that promise so I wouldn't go to another ISP.

Unlimited wasn't my idea. The P2P users never promised you that you'd have awesome, unlimited, and fast Internet. The ISP may have promised you that. If there is a problem with your connection then you need to read your agreement with them. If you feel they aren't keeping their end of the bargain then you need to be complaining to your ISP about it, or switch ISPs. That's where you money is going. It isn't going to me so I'm not obligated to you. The ISP is. If they sold more then they can provide I would call it good old fraud.

But you don't even consider what happens if you become the one that gets throttled. I know you think it's a great idea when it happens to other people, but is it also a good idea if it happens to you?

Web and email don?t take much bandwidth right? Well they take up more than they used to, and I suspect the bandwidth usage by things like web apps and new technologies will only increase the burden. What if every site switches from jpegs to high def video/audio for their advertisements? With new technology perhaps the simple web surfer will become the bandwidth hog. Would it then be fair to throttle those people because the P2P traffic is the lesser of the two?

The P2P programmers have offered to work with the ISPs to adjust the P2P programs so I don't have to leave my own network as much to get what I want. That means I wouldn't have to degrade your ISP as much. I could just hit my local points. However, they need information from the ISPs about their networks to do that. Most of the ISPs have turned those offers down. Yet again that is the fault of the ISP.

That's right. The P2P people that have no obligation to you whatsoever have offered to modify their product so you have a better experience. The ISP that you paid money to, that does have an obligation to you, refused that offer.

[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.