Comcast

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=, Oct 19, 2007.

    1. Advertising

  1. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=

    Guest

    , Oct 19, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  2. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=

    Mara Guest

    Mara, Oct 19, 2007
    #3
  3. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=

    TJ Guest

    wrote in
    news::

    > Rôgêr <> wrote:
    >
    >>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071019/ap_on_hi_te/comcast_data_discrimina
    >>tion

    >
    > Ya beat me to it :)
    >
    > "a crippling blow to the BitTorrent, eDonkey and Gnutella file-sharing
    > networks" " http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21376597/


    Reading between the lines, I'm gonna guess it's more about customers/node
    (IOW, bandwidth) than it as about "blocking" anything.

    I'm gonna guess they (Comcast) got too big too fast in some areas and
    people (in those areas) started complaining about not getting their
    advertised speeds.

    So what would be the logical first course of action for Comcast? IMO it
    would be to find and restrict file-sharing customers in the affected area
    (s) as that's what eats up the most bandwidth.

    Above is my opinion. I could VERY WELL be wrong.

    Below are facts.

    Yes. I am a Comcast customer.
    No. I don't have any trouble with BitTorrent (up or down) in my area.
    TJ, Oct 19, 2007
    #4
  4. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=

    Spuds Guest

    On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 11:22:49 -0500, TJ <> wrote:

    > wrote in
    >news::
    >
    >> Rôgêr <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071019/ap_on_hi_te/comcast_data_discrimina
    >>>tion

    >>
    >> Ya beat me to it :)
    >>
    >> "a crippling blow to the BitTorrent, eDonkey and Gnutella file-sharing
    >> networks" " http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21376597/

    >
    >Reading between the lines, I'm gonna guess it's more about customers/node
    >(IOW, bandwidth) than it as about "blocking" anything.
    >
    >I'm gonna guess they (Comcast) got too big too fast in some areas and
    >people (in those areas) started complaining about not getting their
    >advertised speeds.
    >
    >So what would be the logical first course of action for Comcast? IMO it
    >would be to find and restrict file-sharing customers in the affected area
    >(s) as that's what eats up the most bandwidth.
    >
    >Above is my opinion. I could VERY WELL be wrong.
    >
    >Below are facts.
    >
    >Yes. I am a Comcast customer.
    >No. I don't have any trouble with BitTorrent (up or down) in my area.


    I'll bet you're bang on.
    There's a lot of noise in the binary NGs from Comcast users being warned &/or
    dropped for excessive bandwidth use.
    Spuds, Oct 19, 2007
    #5
  5. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=

    Milano Man Guest

    Some isps have no newsgroups but i've heard stories of Rogers over in
    Canada. Most say it's the worst in existence in the entire world. Rogers
    blocks almost all ports have no newsgroups traffic shape and speed throttle
    everything even all encrypted traffic charge exorbitant fees for using more
    than a few gigabytes a month and i've heard their email never works either.
    Most say dial up is a dream compared to Rogers cable internet. If Comcast
    copies them they won't last to the end of this week.

    TJ wrote:

    > Tony <> wrote in
    > news::
    >
    > <snip>
    >
    > Does anything sensible *ever* come from aioe, or should it go the way of
    > google, and possibly ntli excepting meercat?
    Milano Man, Oct 19, 2007
    #6
  6. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=

    VanguardLH Guest

    "TJ" wrote in message
    news:...
    > So what would be the logical first course of action for Comcast?
    > IMO it
    > would be to find and restrict file-sharing customers in the affected
    > area
    > (s) as that's what eats up the most bandwidth.
    >
    > Above is my opinion. I could VERY WELL be wrong.


    Actually it is Comcast's opinion, too. Read their TOS. It says their
    users are not allowed to run servers or server programs on their hosts
    when using the *personal* service. That includes games servers, too,
    along with file servers, like BitTorrent. Not only can they lower QoS
    for certain datastreams but they could just block them.
    VanguardLH, Oct 19, 2007
    #7
  7. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=

    TJ Guest

    "VanguardLH" <> wrote in news:cPGdnRgIZ_
    :

    > "TJ" wrote in message
    > news:...


    >> So what would be the logical first course of action for Comcast?
    >> IMO it
    >> would be to find and restrict file-sharing customers in the affected
    >> area
    >> (s) as that's what eats up the most bandwidth.
    >>
    >> Above is my opinion. I could VERY WELL be wrong.

    >
    > Actually it is Comcast's opinion, too. Read their TOS. It says their
    > users are not allowed to run servers or server programs on their hosts
    > when using the *personal* service. That includes games servers, too,
    > along with file servers, like BitTorrent. Not only can they lower QoS
    > for certain datastreams but they could just block them.


    Good thing I'm in an unaffected area then.
    TJ, Oct 19, 2007
    #8
  8. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=

    VanguardLH Guest

    "TJ" wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > "VanguardLH" wrote :
    >>
    >> "TJ" wrote ...
    >>>
    >>> So what would be the logical first course of action for Comcast?
    >>> IMO it
    >>> would be to find and restrict file-sharing customers in the
    >>> affected
    >>> area
    >>> (s) as that's what eats up the most bandwidth.
    >>>
    >>> Above is my opinion. I could VERY WELL be wrong.

    >>
    >> Actually it is Comcast's opinion, too. Read their TOS. It says
    >> their
    >> users are not allowed to run servers or server programs on their
    >> hosts
    >> when using the *personal* service. That includes games servers,
    >> too,
    >> along with file servers, like BitTorrent. Not only can they lower
    >> QoS
    >> for certain datastreams but they could just block them.

    >
    > Good thing I'm in an unaffected area then.


    Every Comcast user is in an "affected area". It all depends on
    whether or not Comcast chooses to police their TOS. Anything they
    enforce at any regional hub of theirs can easily be just as easily
    implemented at all their other hubs. So whether they police their TOS
    or not depends on how many abusers they have that affect performance.
    VanguardLH, Oct 19, 2007
    #9
  9. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=

    TJ Guest

    "VanguardLH" <> wrote in news:A-
    :

    > "TJ" wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>
    >> "VanguardLH" wrote :
    >>>
    >>> "TJ" wrote ...
    >>>>
    >>>> So what would be the logical first course of action for Comcast?
    >>>> IMO it
    >>>> would be to find and restrict file-sharing customers in the
    >>>> affected
    >>>> area
    >>>> (s) as that's what eats up the most bandwidth.
    >>>>
    >>>> Above is my opinion. I could VERY WELL be wrong.
    >>>
    >>> Actually it is Comcast's opinion, too. Read their TOS. It says
    >>> their
    >>> users are not allowed to run servers or server programs on their
    >>> hosts
    >>> when using the *personal* service. That includes games servers,
    >>> too,
    >>> along with file servers, like BitTorrent. Not only can they lower
    >>> QoS
    >>> for certain datastreams but they could just block them.

    >>
    >> Good thing I'm in an unaffected area then.

    >
    > Every Comcast user is in an "affected area". It all depends on
    > whether or not Comcast chooses to police their TOS. Anything they
    > enforce at any regional hub of theirs can easily be just as easily
    > implemented at all their other hubs. So whether they police their TOS
    > or not depends on how many abusers they have that affect performance.


    So we agree then, right?
    TJ, Oct 19, 2007
    #10
  10. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=

    John Holmes Guest

    VanguardLH "contributed" in 24hoursupport.helpdesk:

    > "TJ" wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> So what would be the logical first course of action for Comcast?
    >> IMO it
    >> would be to find and restrict file-sharing customers in the affected
    >> area
    >> (s) as that's what eats up the most bandwidth.
    >>
    >> Above is my opinion. I could VERY WELL be wrong.

    >
    > Actually it is Comcast's opinion, too. Read their TOS. It says their
    > users are not allowed to run servers or server programs on their hosts
    > when using the *personal* service. That includes games servers, too,
    > along with file servers, like BitTorrent. Not only can they lower QoS
    > for certain datastreams but they could just block them.
    >


    Stupid policy, I think. My provider allows me to run any server I'd like.
    The only thing they want to do in the near future is to block port 25,
    because it seems there are lots of misconfigured mail servers sitting
    around, spreading spam. If they do it, I have to get myself a new
    provider.

    --
    Your mother was a silly wino who answered a call of nature in a
    vivisection laboratory.
    John Holmes, Oct 19, 2007
    #11
  11. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=

    TJ Guest

    John Holmes <> wrote in
    news::

    > VanguardLH "contributed" in 24hoursupport.helpdesk:
    >
    >> "TJ" wrote in message
    >> news:...


    >>> So what would be the logical first course of action for Comcast?
    >>> IMO it
    >>> would be to find and restrict file-sharing customers in the affected
    >>> area
    >>> (s) as that's what eats up the most bandwidth.
    >>>
    >>> Above is my opinion. I could VERY WELL be wrong.

    >>
    >> Actually it is Comcast's opinion, too. Read their TOS. It says
    >> their users are not allowed to run servers or server programs on
    >> their hosts when using the *personal* service. That includes games
    >> servers, too, along with file servers, like BitTorrent. Not only can
    >> they lower QoS for certain datastreams but they could just block
    >> them.
    >>

    >
    > Stupid policy, I think. My provider allows me to run any server I'd
    > like. The only thing they want to do in the near future is to
    > block port 25, because it seems there are lots of misconfigured mail
    > servers sitting around, spreading spam. If they do it, I have to get
    > myself a new provider.


    As usual, the original point of the converstaion was snipped without
    indication by yet another dumbfuck in this group.

    Here's the article that was originally brought up for discussion by
    Roger;

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071019/ap_on_hi_te/comcast_data_discriminat
    ion

    My stance (right or wrong) is that it's about bandwidth in certain
    oversold Comcast areas, NOT file sharing
    TJ, Oct 19, 2007
    #12
  12. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=

    Tony Guest

    /| /| | | |
    ||__|| | | Piss off,
    / O O\ Wankstain
    / \ |
    / \ \|____________________|
    / _ \ \ ||
    / |\____\ \ ||
    / | | | |\____/ ||
    / \|_|_|/ | _||
    / / \ |____| ||
    / | | | --|
    | | | |____ --|
    * _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
    *-- _--\ _ \ | ||
    / _ \\ | / `
    * / \_ /- | | |
    * ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________


    ------------------------------------------------------------------
    Regards Tony... Making usenet better for everyone everyday
    ------------------------------------------------------------------

    VanguardLH wrote:

    > "TJ" wrote in message
    > news:...
    > >
    > > "VanguardLH" wrote :
    > >>
    > >> "TJ" wrote ...
    > >>>
    > >>> So what would be the logical first course of action for Comcast?
    > >>> IMO it
    > >>> would be to find and restrict file-sharing customers in the
    > >>> affected
    > >>> area
    > >>> (s) as that's what eats up the most bandwidth.
    > >>>
    > >>> Above is my opinion. I could VERY WELL be wrong.
    > >>
    > >> Actually it is Comcast's opinion, too. Read their TOS. It says
    > >> their
    > >> users are not allowed to run servers or server programs on their
    > >> hosts
    > >> when using the *personal* service. That includes games servers,
    > >> too,
    > >> along with file servers, like BitTorrent. Not only can they lower
    > >> QoS
    > >> for certain datastreams but they could just block them.

    > >
    > > Good thing I'm in an unaffected area then.

    >
    > Every Comcast user is in an "affected area". It all depends on
    > whether or not Comcast chooses to police their TOS. Anything they
    > enforce at any regional hub of theirs can easily be just as easily
    > implemented at all their other hubs. So whether they police their TOS
    > or not depends on how many abusers they have that affect performance.
    Tony, Oct 19, 2007
    #13
  13. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=

    Tony Guest

    Commycast is reason enough to bring the lash back to the American judicial
    system. Commycast must pay for their crimes. I'd like to see justice Singapore
    style. If this is a repeat of Rogers up in CanaDUH bring out the 21 gun salute.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regards Tony... Making usenet better for everyone everyday
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rôgêr wrote:

    > http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071019/ap_on_hi_te/comcast_data_discrimination
    Tony, Oct 19, 2007
    #14
  14. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=

    Tony Guest

    /| /| | | |
    ||__|| | | Piss off,
    / O O\ Wankstain
    / \ |
    / \ \|____________________|
    / _ \ \ ||
    / |\____\ \ ||
    / | | | |\____/ ||
    / \|_|_|/ | _||
    / / \ |____| ||
    / | | | --|
    | | | |____ --|
    * _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
    *-- _--\ _ \ | ||
    / _ \\ | / `
    * / \_ /- | | |
    * ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________

    -----------------------------------------------------------------
    Regards Tony... Making usenet better for everyone everyday
    -----------------------------------------------------------------


    TJ wrote:

    > John Holmes <> wrote in
    > news::
    >
    > > VanguardLH "contributed" in 24hoursupport.helpdesk:
    > >
    > >> "TJ" wrote in message
    > >> news:...

    >
    > >>> So what would be the logical first course of action for Comcast?
    > >>> IMO it
    > >>> would be to find and restrict file-sharing customers in the affected
    > >>> area
    > >>> (s) as that's what eats up the most bandwidth.
    > >>>
    > >>> Above is my opinion. I could VERY WELL be wrong.
    > >>
    > >> Actually it is Comcast's opinion, too. Read their TOS. It says
    > >> their users are not allowed to run servers or server programs on
    > >> their hosts when using the *personal* service. That includes games
    > >> servers, too, along with file servers, like BitTorrent. Not only can
    > >> they lower QoS for certain datastreams but they could just block
    > >> them.
    > >>

    > >
    > > Stupid policy, I think. My provider allows me to run any server I'd
    > > like. The only thing they want to do in the near future is to
    > > block port 25, because it seems there are lots of misconfigured mail
    > > servers sitting around, spreading spam. If they do it, I have to get
    > > myself a new provider.

    >
    > As usual, the original point of the converstaion was snipped without
    > indication by yet another dumbfuck in this group.
    >
    > Here's the article that was originally brought up for discussion by
    > Roger;
    >
    > http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071019/ap_on_hi_te/comcast_data_discriminat
    > ion
    >
    > My stance (right or wrong) is that it's about bandwidth in certain
    > oversold Comcast areas, NOT file sharing
    Tony, Oct 19, 2007
    #15
  15. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=

    TJ Guest

    Tony <> wrote in
    news::

    <snip>

    Does anything sensible *ever* come from aioe, or should it go the way of
    google, and possibly ntli excepting meercat?
    TJ, Oct 19, 2007
    #16
  16. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=

    VanguardLH Guest

    "Tony" wrote in message news:...
    > Piss off, Wankstain


    Are you volunteering to be the fire hydrant at the dog walk park?
    VanguardLH, Oct 19, 2007
    #17
  17. TJ wrote:

    > Tony <> wrote:
    >> [stolen ascii art]

    >
    > Does anything sensible *ever* come from aioe, or should it go the way
    > of google, and possibly ntli excepting meercat?


    You could be right.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Regards Beauregard... Making usenet better for everyone everyday
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    --
    -bts
    -perhaps one day Tony the Sandwich
    -will notice how other regulars post
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Oct 19, 2007
    #18
  18. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=

    meerkat Guest

    "TJ" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Tony <> wrote in
    > news::
    >
    > <snip>
    >
    > Does anything sensible *ever* come from aioe, or should it go the
    > way of
    > google, and possibly ntli excepting meercat?
    >

    Appreciated TJ.
    meerkat, Oct 19, 2007
    #19
  19. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=

    Old Gringo Guest

    Old Gringo, Oct 19, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. BCloutier

    comcast newsgroups

    BCloutier, Jul 11, 2005, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    11,931
    BCloutier
    Jul 13, 2005
  2. 2621 and comcast

    , Jul 7, 2005, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    2,029
    voipguy
    Jul 10, 2005
  3. cbtl

    1720 and comcast

    cbtl, Feb 20, 2006, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    2,595
  4. Michelle & Randolph Brown

    IE ERROR BOX when downloading transition IE wizard for Comcast

    Michelle & Randolph Brown, Jun 27, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    522
    Michelle & Randolph Brown
    Jun 27, 2003
  5. david ramon

    Re: "Comcast Mail" <>

    david ramon, Oct 22, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    992
    trout
    Oct 22, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page