Thanks to BitTorrrent, Net neutrality debate reignites

(continued from previous page)

The problem for broadband operators is the protocol eats up huge amounts of bandwidth. To keep their networks moving smoothly, operators have installed equipment from companies such as Sandvine and Ellacoya that inspects packets to identify the type of application being used. Based on policies established by the provider, the traffic can be blocked or limited.

Earlier this year, bloggers noted that BitTorrent sessions appeared to be targeted and blocked by Comcast's service. Comcast repeatedly denied these claims. The Associated Press did its own test and reported last month that several Comcast broadband connections using BitTorrent had been slowed or blocked.

"We engage in reasonable network management to provide all of our customers with a good Internet experience, and we do so consistently with FCC policy."

--David L. Cohen, executive vice president, Comcast

The SavetheInternet.com coalition, along with professors from Yale, Harvard, and Stanford law schools, have filed a complaint and petition with the FCC against Comcast asking the agency to take immediate action to stop Comcast's practices.

Comcast still denies claims that it is blocking any traffic. "Comcast does not, has not, and will not block any Web sites or online applications, including peer-to-peer services, and no one has demonstrated otherwise," David L. Cohen, executive vice president for Comcast, said in a statement. "We engage in reasonable network management to provide all of our customers with a good Internet experience, and we do so consistently with FCC policy."

A Comcast representative said when it detects congestion in the network due to peer-to-peer traffic such as BitTorrent, it slows down that traffic in the network to make room for other kinds of traffic like Web surfing. The management mechanism is only used for the BitTorrent or other peer-to-peer traffic that is causing the congestion.

But in its filings, the SavetheInternet.com Coalition contends that the way in which Comcast manages its network deceives consumers and also violates the open-access principles outlined by the FCC.

Specifically, the group claims that Comcast is using a technique called "spoofing" to slow down or block the BitTorrent traffic. The way it works is that after a BitTorrent session has been established, Comcast interrupts the session like an operator interrupting a phone call who informs both parties that the connection has been disconnected. But instead of breaking into the connection as Comcast, the company pretends to be a customer participating in the BitTorrent session who is simply ending the session.

Net neutrality supporters say neither Comcast nor any other service provider should selectively limit any particular type of traffic. "No one is suggesting that there is no room for bandwidth management," Wu said. "But right now the operators can pick and choose the applications they want on their networks."

Simple quality-of-service networking technologies that limit the amount of bandwidth that each individual user gets could be the answer to this problem, say experts. But Wu believes the issue is not really about bandwidth management. It's about who controls the Internet.

"The whole Net neutrality issue is really about a power struggle," he said. "It all comes down to a scenario where the phone companies and cable operators want to call all the shots about which applications enter the market. And while that may be good for them, I'd argue it's very bad for the country."

[rnieves1977]

FINALLY

The last two sentences are what it's all about...

[Leria]

I agree

I agree that the legal and illegal uses of Bittorrent are what it is all about. While I download SOME copyrighted things off Bittorrent and other file-sharing networks, I take a line at downloading ANYTHING that I can get legally in the United States, such as American movies, music and games...... at least until that last thing, games, are no longer available in stores. THEN, I have no problem with downloading them if they are no longer available because I am not taking money out of the pocket of the game maker.

[directorblue]

Carriers want to turn the Internet into Cable TV

If you read Christopher Yoo's paper (funded by the cable companies), you can see what the carriers are up to. They point to pay-per-view cable (e.g., NFL on DirectTV) as their aspirational example.<br /><br />The carriers' plans are obvious. Is the FCC completely bought and paid for by the telco lobbyists? The answer is obvious even to a casual observer.<br /><br /><a class="jive-link-external" href="http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2007/10/comcasts-world-without-network.html" target="_newWindow">http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2007/10/comcasts-world-without-network.html</a>

[wildchild_plasma_gyro]

More than just neutrality.

The ability to develop extra bandwidth services via buffer/cpu arrays across home and businesses in local areas.<br />Who gets to make use of future changes to the internet infastructre.<br />How to make everything work in realtime and how to satisfy all our demands.<br />Adopting internet 2 advances into the internet at large.<br />How much should local governent make use of the future internet world to extend the commons.<br />Is it best to run everything from a giant central cluster or can the internet be so much more.<br />Should anything have a central server point at all.<br />How well can you make full use of global P2P systems and does making it hybrid with central servers help it. <br /><br />To know how this should all unfold technically america needs atleast a 6 year of engagment<br />during which telecommunications companies should be allow to experiment and certian neutrality issues should be upheld amounst other mesures to ensure fainess and a really engagment towards the best future solution.<br /><br />The probblem is mistakes will cost the potential extendend economy improvments can make orand cost potential growth and economy of systems allready in place.<br /><br />This current wangle is just the tip of the iceberg.<br />intervention is needed and it's about making the right desisions to ensure the best possible future.

[wildchild_plasma_gyro]

Picture Power

Ok so 6 years have pasted and the internet world has changed.<br />All you can do is send pictures via P2P with windows or mac os basic software and all the wesites are having to pay to give you access to their vids.<br />This does still let you produce youtube vids but dosen't really let anyone small compete properly nor does it let you get all the stuff you want.<br />What do you do?, your tied down at your connecting.<br />Even to have a vid on your web site you now have to pay youtube.<br />Horrid ain't it, horrid little horris rules again rest assure you'll only see of comming wars what your supposed to.<br /><br />Surley there must be a clever way round such a problem.<br />Well compression is all about curves and that power you'll have in your home computer you'll be able to curve that data up loads more effectivley than you can today.<br />So you may have a little peice of software that reads special lossless pictures ona site as a video.<br />The software might also collect and send pictures similar to how bit torrent works allowing you to do all the stuff you could before the crack down on neutrality.<br />The software could also change things that it does to stop people stopping it doing what it does.<br /><br />The flaw with controling people who have computers as opposed to people who have TV's is that they have computers not TV's and so long as theres data going round theres a loop hole in the control actions of others and no law can ever come out that can preempt your technical way around the law and the system.

[wildchild_plasma_gyro]

the world has some cool psysics

If your are cheesed off with the idea you might be limited soon on the internet have you ever thought of researching Quantium computer systems with regards to generating large quantium data packets along the earth frequencies. That way no one can stop you.

[AgentSTS]

RE: the world has some cool psysics

I don't mean to be a pest but could you please define the words "psysics" and "quantium" as they're not familiar to me.

[matthewcsims]

Too much RRR?

Hey aren't there too many R's in the headline? It should BitTorrent, not BitTorrrent right?

[matthewcsims]

Well there you go.

See what happens. You write about someone else's typo and make your own. Should be BitTorrent. Ok Karma has convinced me to go to bed now.

[guest86]

BitTorrent will come back

A lot of people not trust with FCC. Just ignore them. Keep upload files and give away free. We not feel so good. We and people are feel little upset right now. Please solve the problems now. We don't want hear from FCC anymore in the future. Keep sharing files with people and make them happy and calm down. You see? That why, I told you.

[lepton68]

Does water co ask what you use the water for?

Does the water company ask what you are using the water for? No. <br />Does the electric company ask what you are using the electricity <br />for? No. Does the phone company ask what I'm going to be talking <br />about? No. Why should my supplier of Internet data ask what I'm <br />doing with the bits? It's not their responsibility.

[yukkione]

water

I was going to use this argument too, but then I realized that they also charge for how much you use, rather than just an open ended service.

[tanis143]

lame arguement

Yes, the water company CAN limit how you use your water. Look at watering bans during peak times during the summer. The power company doesn't care what you use your power for but charges you for its use, as does water. So neither one of those is a good comparison to bandwidth from your ISP, unless you want the ISP's to start charging per bit you use. <br /><br />I admit, Comcast was dumb about this. If they had just stuck with restricting BT uploads and been forthcoming about it, no one would have made a big stink about it, since its their right to monitor and control the bandwidth on their network. However, they were idiotic enough to try and hide what they were doing, plus going the extra step and forging customers id's and sending abort msg's to both ends of a BT upload. <br /><br />However, as being part of the telecommunications industry, I do not want to see the ISP's lose the right to manage their network, and on the flip side I dont want them to get too much control over what and how they control on their network. It all comes down to a balance, not one side over the other. But, this is American politics, so you know thats not gonna happen.

[Heebee Jeebies]

Net Neutrality Laws are Needed!

Not only for things like this. But, to keep the web accessable for all users and all businesses. If companies like Comcast, AT&#38;T, etc. are allowed to control traffic based on who pays the most or who has the most favorible relationship with companies that control traffic flow on the net then only the large companies with deep pockets like Yahoo, Google, etc. will have any type of quick access. <br /><br />The rest of use unless we want to pay millions will be out out of business and basically told who's information we can read and who we can do business with because gaining access to everything else will be slow and problamatic. This will set up the perfect environment also for blackmail and extortion type setups. If you don't think big companies would do things like this then you need to pull your heads out of the sand. Remember Enron, Health South, etc. etc. <br /><br />Companies who's only goal is to make money can not be trusted to keep the web open and accessible for everyone. Greed will always win out this is why Comcast has increased their cable prices 93% over the last few years. Not because they give more, but because they just simply want more of your money. Greed will always win out over honesty and fairness. <br /><br />Unfortunately, this also applies to the US government who is just run by a bunch of old idiot's. Who will do whatever the biggest contributor will ask them to do. As an example the DMCA!<br /><br />Robert

[dondarko]

the summary

"The whole Net neutrality issue is really about a power struggle," he said. "It all comes down to a scenario where the phone companies and cable operators want to call all the shots about which applications enter the market. And while that may be good for them, I'd argue it's very bad for the country."<br /><br />nuff said

[ceoballmer]

Should be illegal!

the torrents are just full of stolen stuff!<br /><a class="jive-link-external" href="http://fakesteveballmer*blogspot.com" target="_newWindow">http://****************.blogspot.com</a>

[yukkione]

net nuetrality

I had Verizons Fios, they cut me off after a billing error from over a year ago "resurfaced". When trying to get service restored they would not give me help because i do not have a verizon phone. Also if I downloaded anything with BT, I would find my service was interupted and i would have to reset my router. This industry needs regulation.

[David Arbogast]

you need to be rescued?

&lt;,This industry needs regulation.&gt;&gt;<br /><br />You have bad service from 1 provider and thus you conclude that the Federal Government must come to the rescue? <br /><br />Wrong. Capitalism works. And if you don't like Verizon's service, you'll go to another provider, and Verizon will lose money. Why do you need the federal government to solve all your problems? Haven't you realized yet that government regulation of the Internet is a "Bad Thing?"

[dgiamanco]

New BitTorrent Service

A solution to keeping the BitTorrent protocol open is to have a new public announcement service built upon it. Something like a decentralized internet warning system, where keeping a connection open is vital to information being passed around. Of course this whole idea would have to be thought out correctly, but by making the BitTorrent protocol necessary for some "good" uses, you also keep it open for everything else.

[sys6656]

I love all of the "Do-Gooders" out there..

First off.. I use Bit Torrent to download huge files that are totally 100% legal. Linux ISO files are one. Bit Torrent software isn't in legal to use. It's not just about the bandwidth.. it's about ComCast tell "You".. the customer and the user, what internet applications you can and can not run. So all of you "Do-Gooders" that think this is just about stopping downloading of music and movies.. your shooting your own freedom in the foot. Period. Read More and learn: <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://savetheinternet.com/" target="_newWindow">http://savetheinternet.com/</a>

[David Arbogast]

No.

You are correct that this is not about illegal music. You are correct that this is about freedom. <br /><br />Where you go wrong.. is that you only consider your own freedoms. It is a very selfish perspective. Essentially, what you are saying is... "I know exactly what kind of service I want, and I want the government to force ABC Company to give me that service."<br /><br />Well... what just happened to ABC Company's freedom? You stomped all over it, didn't you. Providers need to be free to run their own networks. If you don't like their service, you'll find a new provider. Its just that simple. If a provider loses too much business, they'll be forced to switch strategies. It is sad that you thin "Saving" the Internet is somethign the Federal government can do. The Internet matured w/o government interaction, and will survive as a robust and ever-changing platform, so long as we keep government's meddling hands out of it. <br /><br />Support freedom of the Internet. If I build MY network, and you connect to it, then I get to make the rules. If its your network, you make the rules. If you don't like my rules, pay somebody who has better rules. This is the essence of freedom. What you suggest is the opposite. You suggest government revocation of the rights of network owners. Why should you enjoy freedom while the people who build businesses to service you are forced into regulation?

[ceoballmer]

Neutrality is never good!

When in neutral you go nowhere!<br /><a class="jive-link-external" href="http://fakesteveballmer*blogspot.com" target="_newWindow">http://****************.blogspot.com</a>

[MSSlayer]

Too bad the Comcast/bittorent issue has nothing to do with net neutrality

The ignorance by the CNET staff is alarming.

[BullyBalla]

+Yeah+

An ISP limiting the bandwidth to a certain service has absolutely nothing to do with net neutrality... The ignorance by some people is alarming.

[jmarcellais]

Neutrality is a mute point

The US ranks 17th in broadband connections per capita. And in terms of average speed of a broadband connection in America, it's a joke. Japan leads the world in broadband speed with an "Average" connection of 60Megabits where the US average speed is lagging under 10 closer to 5 Megabits. If the ISPs in this country would just concern themselves with giving us fast connections, mainly fiber to the home, then all this talk about throttling anyone or anything will cease immediately. TV through your ISP is already a reality in Japan, and in HighDef. There's a lot of business to be done on a 60Megabit connection to the house, cable and phone companies need to wake up to this.

[jmarcellais]

links for stats

<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/Images/commentarynews/broadbandspeedchart.jpg" target="_newWindow">http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/Images/commentarynews/broadbandspeedchart.jpg</a>

[criticny]

WTF! Thanks to Comcast . . .

The headlines for this article are so biased, I won't even bother to read it. <br /><br />Who decided to attribute Comcast's recent bad behavior to a P2P app that's been around for years? Pheh. Pteui. Ach. <br /><br />As for "Eating up bandwidth . . .", not even worth commenting on.