Rogers Throttling the P2P applications

[geokilla]

3 hours ago, before I got a new modem, my download speeds were at 220KB. Now, after setting up the new modem I get 0! Yes, 0! So I did some googling and found out that Rogers started doing this since the beginning of February. I called tech support and found out that this throttling was done on purpose.

Is there a way to get past this throttling?? This simply isn't fair for us consumers! Usually it takes me 20min to download a complete episode of anime, but in 1 hour, I have only 3MB completed!!

The sad thing is that I can't go to Bell because of bad previous experience. If things continue like this, Rogers is going to lose a LOT of customers in the next few months.

Rogers and Bell = Canadian ISP

 

[MegaVovaN]

what reason they give for cutting speed?

 

[geokilla]

Gave Rogers a call just now. The guy said that the throttling was to stop people from downloading illegal software. Well that's stupid.....

 

[n0cmonkey]

If you don't like their rules, get another ISP or give them a well thought out reason to not stop their lines from being saturated by a few people downloading cartoons.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
If you don't like their rules, get another ISP or give them a well thought out reason to not stop their lines from being saturated by a few people downloading cartoons.

Yep.

What protocol are you using OP? torrents?

You're leaching days are over. Don't copy that floppy.

oh - and EVERY ISP OUT THERE WANT'S TO LOSE YOU. Best part about it is we sit in strategy sessions on how to get rid of you and force you to another provider.

It's similar to "how to we kick the homeless out of our city?" Easy, you force them to go elsewhere.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
If you don't like their rules, get another ISP or give them a well thought out reason to not stop their lines from being saturated by a few people downloading cartoons.

Yep.

What protocol are you using OP? torrents?

You're leaching days are over. Don't copy that floppy.

oh - and EVERY ISP OUT THERE WANT'S TO LOSE YOU. Best part about it is we sit in strategy sessions on how to get rid of you and force you to another provider.

It's similar to "how to we kick the homeless out of our city?" Easy, you force them to go elsewhere.

So you like losing money? Hurt the many to get at the few? It's like dropping a nuke on a city to get rid of a convict.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
So you like losing money? Hurt the many to get at the few? It's like dropping a nuke on a city to get rid of a convict.

Actually getting rid of the leachers (90% of capacity is used by the top 5% of users).

Getting rid of these people greaty increases the bandwidth for all customers. The easiest and most effective way to do this is by rate-limiting torrents. It's stops it DEAD.

 

[cmdrdredd]

You mean customers who just check email and sit on myspace all day? lol Cause the average user isn't downloading 30GB of amine every month.

 

[robmurphy]

I think torrents/P2P will have to be allowed soon.

Virginmedia (NTL/Telewest) has been reported to be trialing bittorrent to distribute TV programs to its subscribers. See:

http://www.cambridgegateway.com/news/2006/archive_cachelogic-ntl.htm

TimeWarner has announced that it will use bittorrent to deliver motion pictures. See:

http://www.timewarner.com/corp/newsroom/pr/0,20812,1192450,00.html

Many of the linux distros have moved away from FTP to using P2P. When I first tried to download a linux CD windows FTP fell over several times before it downloaded successfuly. This wastes bandwidth more than P2P. I was also stupid enough to not realise that windows FTP will not allow file sizes > 4 GB, so trying to download a linux DVD wasted a fair amount of bandwidth. It did not help that NTL's tech support did not have a clue about the 4 GB limit either. Since then I use bittorent. The client I use is utorrent, its small and much better than the normal bittorrent client.

VirginMedia in the UK finaly changed my cable modem, after telling me that it was not bittorrent crashing it, just simply that it could not handle the 10Mbs connection reliably. NTL had always said it was fine. I've not managed to crash the new cable modem yet, and I have been trying. It will be interesting to see how it works with the new 20Mbs service starting in May. VirginMedia taking over NTL/Telewest in the UK has been quite positive for me so far.

Thats just my 2p worth.

Rob Murphy

 

[LightninTrip]

It is unfortunate, I work for a smaller ISP, and we too recently started filtering P2P, we put a 20kbps download limit, and 10kbps upload, it wasn't until my company got letters from the BSA, reporting 2 of our customers were distributing warez(mainly WinXP) via P2P. I am sure we will lose some customers because of it.

 

[StopSign]

Switch to Teksavvy. They use the same lines has Bell but their customer service is excellent. They offer two DSL packages:

- Premium (low ping, 100 GB monthly limit)
- Unlimited (slightly higher ping, unlimited bandwidth)

And they don't throttle torrents. $30 a month for 5 Mbit connection.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
You mean customers who just check email and sit on myspace all day? lol Cause the average user isn't downloading 30GB of amine every month.

Yes, the other 95% of the internet who wouldn't be hurt in any way shape or form by throttling torrents.

 

[JackMDS]

Quote: ?We're ALL GETTING RIPPED?.

Now that is poetic justice (or may be just an Oxymoron). The people that rip of other people copyrighted work get Ripped Off in doing it.:shocked:

BTW, since I am sure that you are using the download for a new brake through Medical research. Write to the ISP explain, and provide prove to what you are doing. I am sure they would try to help you.

 

[robmurphy]

Funnily enough my argument with NTL/VirginMedia was that the Linux distros used P2P, so just because I was downloading a DVD did not mean it was illegal. Did not wash with NTL, but VirginMedia then decided that my cable modem did need replacing as it would not handle the 10Mbs service (I was on 10Mbs with NTL). NTL who installed it were adamant that the modem would support 10Mbs. There again NTL tech support also used to tell me that there was not limit in file size on the windows FTP client.

Rob Murphy

 

[n0cmonkey]

Most worthwhile distributions also provide a way to purchase cds or download them through HTTP/FTP...

 

[robmurphy]

I know that but I had the FTP sessions fall over more than a few times. I prefer to download, as some distros do not even boot, I had this with Red Hat. The CD would not even boot on one machine. Other distros booted no problem. Re downloaded, burnt on several different machines. Conclusion Redhat did not work with that machine. It was not a matter of supplying the correct command line switches as it did not even get to that stage.

Most of the mirros sites for the downloads throttle now, and suggest using torrents so you can't realy win.

One thing that is often not mentioned is that when the 10Mbs service started it was capped at 75GB per month. My combined up and download for the torrnents was about 50 GB, and the rest of use for browsing and the od SP would not have taken it above the 75 GB. If people keep under the cap given then what is the problem?

Rob Murphy

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: robmurphy
I know that but I had the FTP sessions fall over more than a few times. I prefer to download, as some distros do not even boot, I had this with Red Hat. The CD would not even boot on one machine. Other distros booted no problem. Re downloaded, burnt on several different machines. Conclusion Redhat did not work with that machine. It was not a matter of supplying the correct command line switches as it did not even get to that stage.

Most of the mirros sites for the downloads throttle now, and suggest using torrents so you can't realy win.

One thing that is often not mentioned is that when the 10Mbs service started it was capped at 75GB per month. My combined up and download for the torrnents was about 50 GB, and the rest of use for browsing and the od SP would not have taken it above the 75 GB. If people keep under the cap given then what is the problem?

Rob Murphy

The pipes are only so big...

 

[nweaver]

the worlds smallest violin is playing a sad song for you....

So you like losing money? Hurt the many to get at the few? It's like dropping a nuke on a city to get rid of a convict.

no, they like MAKING money, that is why limiting the P2P users is happening. It's EXPENSIVE to have a high bandwidth users. The folks who browse the web and download music from ITunes while checking email will not know their pipe is throttled, because the rules won't hit their traffic.

The required car analogy
Bandwidth is like gas....the ISP pays for gas used....and usually oversells their gas supply (i.e. 10 users with "5Mb/s" DSL does not mean the ISP reserves 50Mb/s for those 10 users). Most folks sit WELL under the gas they pay for (or bandwidth) they are able to do this alot. When someone comes along who uses LOTS of gas, profits go down, and there is less "gas" for other users....so your lucrative users that don't use much suffer (and look elsewhere).

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
The tubes are only so big...

Fixed

- M4H

 

[realEZE]

Originally posted by: robmurphyOne thing that is often not mentioned is that when the 10Mbs service started it was capped at 75GB per month. My combined up and download for the torrnents was about 50 GB, and the rest of use for browsing and the od SP would not have taken it above the 75 GB. If people keep under the cap given then what is the problem?

Rob Murphy

Exactly.

Subscribers paid for 3-8 Mbps service, and should get that service.

In essence, Rogers is downgrading P2P users to a lower service-level than non-P2P users, by shaping their collective bandwidth.

I'm not defending P2P-user rights, I am just pointing out that Rogers should specify that P2P traffic is subject to shaping, before signing customers up to long-term contracts which contain early-termination clauses.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: azzlikr
Exactly.

Subscribers paid for 3-8 Mbps service, and should get that service.

In essence, Rogers is downgrading P2P users to a lower service-level than non-P2P users, by shaping their collective bandwidth.

I'm not defending P2P-user rights, I am just pointing out that Rogers should specify that P2P traffic is subject to shaping, before signing customers up to long-term contracts which contain early-termination clauses.

It's all outlined in the acceptible terms of use. Torrenting like this is abuse.

 

[realEZE]

Originally posted by: spidey07

It's all outlined in the acceptible terms of use. Torrenting like this is abuse.

Just as an aside, This wasn't outlined in their AUP when I first signed up in 1993.

AUP is dynamic, what's abuse now, may not be abuse tomorrow.

 

[nweaver]

Originally posted by: azzlikr

Originally posted by: spidey07

It's all outlined in the acceptible terms of use. Torrenting like this is abuse.

Just as an aside, This wasn't outlined in their AUP when I first signed up in 1993.

AUP is dynamic, what's abuse now, may not be abuse tomorrow.

there was likely a clause that said they can change the AUP anytime they wanted, and that you should contact them/check online for the most recent AUP.

 

[Scarpozzi]

I have to throttle my own network just for my VOIP to work. (I have roommates)

It's crazy when you consider how much damage one user can do to a network if left unchecked.

 

[realEZE]

Originally posted by: nweaver

Originally posted by: azzlikr

Originally posted by: spidey07

It's all outlined in the acceptible terms of use. Torrenting like this is abuse.

Just as an aside, This wasn't outlined in their AUP when I first signed up in 1993.

AUP is dynamic, what's abuse now, may not be abuse tomorrow.

there was likely a clause that said they can change the AUP anytime they wanted, and that you should contact them/check online for the most recent AUP.

Which is why AUP is generally not legally enforceable.