Comcast squares off against supporters of "Net Neutrality"
By Fred Derf, 13 February 2008 - 03:49 38 comments
Under fire from consumer groups and law professors who have issued formal complaints to the Federal Communications Commission, Comcast has told the FCC that hampering some file-sharing by its subscribers was a justifiable way to keep Web traffic flowing for everyone.
The groups say Comcast (the second-largest ISP in the U.S.) has breached the principle, known as "'Net Neutrality," of treating all Internet traffic equally. Comcast says it must curb some file-sharing traffic because some subscribers would otherwise hog the cables with their uploads and slow traffic in their neighborhood.
Comcast also said it was justified in using "reset" packets to break off communications between two computers. Comcast sometimes inserts these packets in the data stream to kill a file-sharing session. The move "fools" each computer into believing the other computer wants to end the connection. The return addresses of Comcast's packets indicate they're from one of the file-sharing computers when they are in fact from Comcast.
They also say the company was hampering movie downloading services because they might compete with Comcast's cable TV business.
Comments (38)
rukiri - 13 February 2008 - 03:53
isn't that a false argument? they're basically saying, hey, if a few people actually use everything we're selling them, it kills our business model! if they're network can't support their advertised speeds, maybe they shouldn't advertise them?
No, because all the advertised services say "up to X Mbps". They never suggest you'll hit the peak, just that you technically can based on the boot file they send your modem.
Many users, however, go up and beyond the "peak". Until I upgraded recently, my service was capped at 6 Mbps, but boosting up to 20 Mbps at points.
Angel Blue01 - 14 February 2008 - 00:31
Then its not really a peak is it?
Fred Derf - 13 February 2008 - 03:55
I thought the bit about "reset" packets containing fake return addresses was even more scandalous.
Optix Illusion - 13 February 2008 - 04:02
Comcast says it must curb some file-sharing traffic because some subscribers would otherwise hog the cables with their uploads and slow traffic in their neighborhood.
Then with the ridiculous overpricing of cable internet services, they better start laying down that fiber optic cable to consumers houses then.
I'm pretty positive that upgrading to DOCSIS 3 would be cheaper and quicker than replacing all that copper with fiber.
0sm3l - 13 February 2008 - 04:19
yea keep blaming the customers for the lack of upgrades on their part ;). Most people are using broadband now they need to get better!
yea keep blaming the customers for the lack of upgrades on their part ;). Most people are using broadband now they need to get better!
Well it's not like they can just push out DOCSIS 3 and be done with it. There isn't even an ample amount of certified equipment out there to support such an action.
So they are pushing for it (and possibly even testing with silver or bronze certified equipment), but it's a waiting game to see what manufacturer can get the equipment out that meets their standards.
Optix Illusion - 13 February 2008 - 12:42
Yep, DOCSIS 3 internet. 100mbps download, 16kbps upload for a whopping low price of 109.99 a month.
I am sure the U.S cable companies have soaked the consumers plenty enough with that copper for the last 30+ years..
There isn't much copper to replace! Comcast has fiber to the node then copper to the premisis... so basicallu 90% of comcast's network is fiber... its just the last stretch form the node that is copper... it would cost comcast WAY less then verizon to go all fiber... and I mean massively less
Yep, DOCSIS 3 internet. 100mbps download, 16kbps upload for a whopping low price of 109.99 a month.
I am sure the U.S cable companies have soaked the consumers plenty enough with that copper for the last 30+ years..
You might want to look into how CMTS and HFC works... because it is not copper... it is.. drum roll please... FIBER! Only from the node to your house is copper... so at most 1 whole mile is copper... whoo hoo... comcast / adelphia / TW all them in the past 10 years spent billions to put fiber out there... in my town 95% of the network is fiber... and this is not a big town! DOCSIS3 might want to look at the specs on it while your at it... no one will ver get 100Mbit down... 4 channel docsis is 171.52Mbit downstream, 122.88Mbit upstream... 8 channel is twice as much... but that is per node... fiber goes to the node... so that is 171Mbit across maybe 100 houses... they would NEVER sell 100Mbit connections to a house... maybe 20, 30Mbit but never higher then that... and comcast could easily put fiber to the house with no problems... Motorola has a hybrid node now that lets you send out both to the house! I hate comcast, but saying they are milking copper is pure BS...
Optix Illusion - 13 February 2008 - 15:10
You might want to look into how CMTS and HFC works... because it is not copper... it is.. drum roll please... FIBER! Only from the node to your house is copper... so at most 1 whole mile is copper... whoo hoo... comcast / adelphia / TW all them in the past 10 years spent billions to put fiber out there... in my town 95% of the network is fiber... and this is not a big town! DOCSIS3 might want to look at the specs on it while your at it... no one will ver get 100Mbit down... 4 channel docsis is 171.52Mbit downstream, 122.88Mbit upstream... 8 channel is twice as much... but that is per node... fiber goes to the node... so that is 171Mbit across maybe 100 houses... they would NEVER sell 100Mbit connections to a house... maybe 20, 30Mbit but never higher then that... and comcast could easily put fiber to the house with no problems... Motorola has a hybrid node now that lets you send out both to the house! I hate comcast, but saying they are milking copper is pure BS...
Translation to my statement: With as much money they have soaked from the consumer using copper, they should be able to afford to lay FIBER cable! I never once said they would implement DOCSIS 3 internet on copper wire.
Skwerl - 13 February 2008 - 16:04
The local loop contains A LOT of copper to replace! That's a really expensive undertaking, and there's not a profitable reason for the phone companies to do it yet. You might get fiber-to-the-curb, but that last stretch to the house isn't likely to be replaced for a long time- either until fiber becomes dramatically more economical than copper to maintain and install (we're getting close), or the phone companies get something out of it. That means they'll need to start offering high def movies or get into the cable television business, which is not something they'll be able to do without opposition, given their current monopolies.
The local loop contains A LOT of copper to replace! That's a really expensive undertaking, and there's not a profitable reason for the phone companies to do it yet. You might get fiber-to-the-curb, but that last stretch to the house isn't likely to be replaced for a long time- either until fiber becomes dramatically more economical than copper to maintain and install (we're getting close), or the phone companies get something out of it. That means they'll need to start offering high def movies or get into the cable television business, which is not something they'll be able to do without opposition, given their current monopolies.
Yes local loops have a lot of copper, but comcast is a cable company not a phone company... they use a different technology... Comcast uses fiberoptic lines to the node... and there is one node per negiborhood... it is DRASTICALLY and I mean DRASTICALLY less expensive for comcast to go pure fiber then a phone company that uses local loops... no idea why you are talking about phone companies... when this article is about comcast which is a tv cable company...
Translation to my statement: With as much money they have soaked from the consumer using copper, they should be able to afford to lay FIBER cable! I never once said they would implement DOCSIS 3 internet on copper wire. :rolleyes:
X'tyfe - 13 February 2008 - 04:15
tough **** for them, maybe they should upgrade there 20 year old systems to support the growing population
They are. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOCSIS (refer to DOCSIS 3)
Davebo - 13 February 2008 - 12:42
You think we can't spot a comcrap apologist for what it is?
kak - 13 February 2008 - 06:12
I'm a Comcast customer and I have to say that I am not impressed. Adelphia's speed was higher and their available stations were better, too. Too bad they went bankrupt from poor ownership. I'll be switching to satellite when I can and be hoping Comcast isn't the only high-speed internet available when I move.
GFree - 13 February 2008 - 10:31
This is ridiculous. The desire for more content (and hence bandwidth) is only going to increase in the future, anyone can see that. What game are Comcast playing?
They're delaying the inevitable. If they don't invest in infrastructure to support the bandwidth to deliver the content that people WILL want, then they're going to end up in trouble.