Slingshot preparing the throttle/trafficshape users?

Forums › 2degrees (including Slingshot, Orcon, Flip, Stuff Fibre, MyRepublic, 2talk and Vocus) › Slingshot preparing the throttle/trafficshape users?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

1819 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#107296 28-Jan-2008 23:02

Having a slower p2p speeds while peek times is not bad.

I wonder about the next level of internet we will get on DSL the 30KBps 90KBps 180kBps and how the new shaping will work with that.
If your guaranteed a 30KB connection then they should not be able to 30KB 24/7 and get 30KB on ya torrent (torrent permitting)

I see that ~~Comcom~~ Comcast in the USA blocks torrents, but people still use tunnels the get there data out of there network.

Tradepub

Free professional, reference and technical white papers (affiliate link).

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#107301 28-Jan-2008 23:19

hellonearthisman: Having a slower p2p speeds while peek times is not bad.

I think it is. Any ISP that I sign up with in NZ is providing me with a service that delivers me a maximum theoretical speed for my connection and a monthly data cap for my connection. Why should they be deciding what I can do with that connection?

Why should P2P traffic be throttled? Because people could be downloading "illegal" content at 3Mbps and sucking their precious bandwidth? How does this differ to people who want to stream video content or download large quantities of data from other sources? Depending on who's studies you read P2P traffic now accounts for somewhere along the lines of 50% - 80% of all internet traffic. Throttling the main form of internet traffic is nothing but penny pinching by ISP's who can see there is money to be saved by not having to invest in extra bandwidth. Imagine if this had happened in the mid 90's and instead of trying to expand the internet everybody stuck with slow connections and decided that people didn't need anything more than a 56k connection because they would just download warez and pirated movies if they had something faster?

bradstewart

4335 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#107305 28-Jan-2008 23:24

sbiddle:
hellonearthisman: Having a slower p2p speeds while peek times is not bad.

I think it is. Any ISP that I sign up with in NZ is providing me with a service that delivers me a maximum theoretical speed for my connection and a monthly data cap for my connection. Why should they be deciding what I can do with that connection?

Why should P2P traffic be throttled? Because people could be downloading "illegal" content at 3Mbps and sucking their precious bandwidth? How does this differ to people who want to stream video content or download large quantities of data from other sources? Depending on who's studies you read P2P traffic now accounts for somewhere along the lines of 50% - 80% of all internet traffic. Throttling the main form of internet traffic is nothing but penny pinching by ISP's who can see there is money to be saved by not having to invest in extra bandwidth. Imagine if this had happened in the mid 90's and instead of trying to expand the internet everybody stuck with slow connections and decided that people didn't need anything more than a 56k connection because they would just download warez and pirated movies if they had something faster?

And I thought we lived in an age where it was accepted to place restrictions on civil liberties including your right to high speed internet access

manhinli

2483 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#107308 28-Jan-2008 23:28

High speed broadband Internet which isn't high speed broadband Internet seems to makes sense in their minds...

Find me on Twitter!

I posted 1, 2 x 10^3 times!

cokemaster

Exited
4921 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#107310 28-Jan-2008 23:38

hellonearthisman: Having a slower p2p speeds while peek times is not bad.

I wonder about the next level of internet we will get on DSL the 30KBps 90KBps 180kBps and how the new shaping will work with that.
If your guaranteed a 30KB connection then they should not be able to 30KB 24/7 and get 30KB on ya torrent (torrent permitting)

I see that Comcom in the USA blocks torrents, but people still use tunnels the get there data out of there network.

If people are paying for bandwidth then with the exceptions of congestion and line speed issues, they should be getting as fast as they can get. Its would be damned insulting if you were paying by the GB and Slingshot decides that your downloads should suffer for the sake of reducing load on their network.

If people are paying for 'managed' data plans (typically flat rate plans) then thats fine, as long as its communicated across clearly.

If you are referring to the provider Comcast, who had an damning allegation that they were screwing with peoples TCP/IP packets, then you'd find that they are getting some rather negative reactions to it. There is no reason why people should have to resort to tunnelling to another provider or country to get good peer to peer traffic.

Steve hits it right on the head with his post.

This coming from the ISP that was opposed to cabinetisation and would rather just provide the same DSL services using DSL1/2+ equipment with the same copper (to their credit, they weren't the only ones though). Go figure.

webhosting

Loose lips may sink ships - Be smart - Don't post internal/commercially sensitive or confidential information!

hellonearthisman

1819 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#107321 29-Jan-2008 02:47

Sorry ComCom, I did mean ComCast.

Your all right, that if I but the internet then I should be able to use it how I desire.
I hope that they are verbose when it comes to defining the plans and not full of catchy sound bytes.

Slingshot have posted this on there forums, http://forums.slingshot.co.nz/viewtopic.php?p=8290#8290

Slingshot:
Hi,
This is very old news.... we have had the “Cisco equipment” in place for well over a year now! We do not throttle anything with it except for nasty stuff like malicious activity such as bots etc. We do however use its capabilities to ensure that latency sensitive traffic is looked after and not hurt by downloads etc.

I have been over this many times (go search for my posts) and am a little confused as to how this story has been represented by the news item.

Once again:
WE DO NOT THROTTLE YOUR TRAFFIC!!!!

Thanks,

Greybeard.

Fraktul

836 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#107426 29-Jan-2008 16:58

If you read Slingshots response you will see that what they are trying to accomplish is ensuring a good user experience for all.

Slingshot sell data, preventing users from downloading does not make much sense from their POV. However losing customers who have a poor experience with media streams and other time dependent data transmissions also does not make much sense. Ideally they would have huge amounts of international transit capacity so this is never an issue during peak times, however most end users are probably not willing to pay for those kind of contention ratios.

At the end of the day it’s all about maximizing end user experience, end user pricing, your network infrastructure and your margins. What needs to be realized is that:

- Data to end users is a commodity, ISPs have an interest in not trying to restrict how much of that commodity you can purchase off them.

- Network resources are currently contended for consumer broadband connections but this is inherent through the TCNZ access network and the nature of the Internet itself being best efforts to a degree in addition to your ISPs international transit capacity.

- Network resource is contended for a reason, it lowers end user pricing and ideally offers small or negligible impact on most end users.

- If you are finding that your ISP or network access provider is over contending to a degree which is impacting on you to an unacceptable degree you have the right to vote with your feet. Having a rant in a forum does not equate to hitting them where it hurts, on the bottom line.

- ISPs will try to maxamise end user experience as one of the tools to retain customers in a competitive market. This may mean ensuring time sensitive traffic is treated preferentially over non time sensitive traffic in a contended network during peak times. Most end users probably won’t mind waiting 60 seconds extra for a torrent to finish vs. having their youtube videos having buffer under runs or paying an extra $30 a month (arbitrary figure) for a lower contention network.

cokemaster

Exited
4921 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#107443 29-Jan-2008 20:15

While it is good to have official confirmation on the matter, I couldn't help but click the link....

Forum link

freitasm takes the wrong end of the stick and waves it around like its the be all and end all of information ....

geekzone = wxc forums ... expect no other love there

And there you have it, if you can't grasp logic - attack the person. Remember it wasn't geekzone that wrote or published the article as well.

Should ops or anyone else decide to read this thread - these are not the worldxchange forums, yes they have a forum but they are subjected to the same 'fury of the trolls' as other providers (see also the thread about the speed issues). However unlike Slingshots previous skmish into these forums rather than attacking people, they help people.

Clearly they 'get' it, lets see if certain individuals from Slingshot do....

webhosting

Loose lips may sink ships - Be smart - Don't post internal/commercially sensitive or confidential information!

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79020 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#107445 29-Jan-2008 20:25

hellonearthisman: http://forums.slingshot.co.nz/viewtopic.php?p=8332

What a shame. Saying Geekzone and WxC are fanboys of each other. You have been here for some time and haven't noticed yet that there are forums for other providers as well?

Everytime WxC came across a problem reported in this forum they worked to fix it.

When Slingshot came across a problem reported in this forum they badmouthed us.

Obviously there's a reason why people have their preferences. And I have already told to the world what I think of Slingshot.

But you, sir. I never thought you would write that.

My technology disclosure

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79020 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#107447 29-Jan-2008 20:29

On that forum link Slingshot also say I got the wrong end... Well of course, I got the end user side of the stick, not theirs.

My technology disclosure

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79020 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#107448 29-Jan-2008 20:53

Fraktul:
If you read Slingshots response you will see that what they are trying to accomplish is ensuring a good user experience for all.

Slingshot sell data, preventing users from downloading does not make much sense from their POV. However losing customers who have a poor experience with media streams and other time dependent data transmissions also does not make much sense. Ideally they would have huge amounts of international transit capacity so this is never an issue during peak times, however most end users are probably not willing to pay for those kind of contention ratios.

At the end of the day it’s all about maximizing end user experience, end user pricing, your network infrastructure and your margins. What needs to be realized is that:

This is so wrong. If they sell a 50 GB block to you then you are paying for tha allocated traffic, at full speed (or the speed contracted). Their network is not suffering, because they knew when they sold the data blocks, that capacity was there. And they are being paid for that. If the traffic is email, web, newsgroups, or P2P it doesn't matter it is still 50 GB, and paid for by the user/

Users are not guilty if those ISPs are stupid enough to promote "unlimited" at prices that are a joke. They should put the real price and stop with this tactic of bait and switch.

If they have no capacity then they should limit the data blocks on sale, perhaps making an auction where prices will vary depending on availability.

My technology disclosure

gi99a

32 posts

Geek

#107456 29-Jan-2008 21:21

I agree....

many "small" ISP's wanted Xtras customer based and lured customers with amazing offers. Now they may have increased their customer base and are realising how difficult it is to manage data in order to please everyone. I am not fully opposed to limiting peer 2 peer, but do agree that especially for data capped plans, one uses how one wishes.

If Sligshot aint throttling or planning to, where did that Stuff artical come from? I also had to laugh that it called CallPlus "Junior" LOL...

bradstewart

4335 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#107457 29-Jan-2008 21:22

To quote hellonearthisman on the Slingshot forums:

The WxC / Geekzone is a bit much, they are just fan boys of each other and argue strongly as SS.
ss = not throttling
and
WxC/GeekZone = not the same
But it does wind them up so when it's said.

For some reason I am not at all surprised by your comments. My question to you is this; why take part in this community when you are badmouthing it on other forums?

There is a real dynamic here, people love and hate all the ISPs. There is no favouritism shown by the staff of Geekzone towards any of them. I for one take issue with most of the ISPs for not being upfront or having some dodgy practices.

Compare that to the SS forums where everyone seems to be madly in love with said ISP and anyone else is a WxC fanboy.

hellonearthisman

1819 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#107458 29-Jan-2008 21:25

freitasm:
hellonearthisman: http://forums.slingshot.co.nz/viewtopic.php?p=8332

What a shame. Saying Geekzone and WxC are fanboys of each other. You have been here for some time and haven't noticed yet that there are forums for other providers as well?

Everytime WxC came across a problem reported in this forum they worked to fix it.

When Slingshot came across a problem reported in this forum they badmouthed us.

Obviously there's a reason why people have their preferences. And I have already told to the world what I think of Slingshot.

But you, sir. I never thought you would write that.

Sometimes, I just write dumb stuff. Sorry. I have edited what I said there as my meaning was unclear. My use of fanboy was wrong and I'm sorry.

From what I know, Slingshot thought it bringing it's forums here, but didn't because of, I don't think there was a list resaons published. But they have a nice forum community, with the ever angy Ops (I think you have encountered him, he got off his chain :)

Fraktul

836 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#107485 29-Jan-2008 22:48

freitasm:
Fraktul:
If you read Slingshots response you will see that what they are trying to accomplish is ensuring a good user experience for all.

Slingshot sell data, preventing users from downloading does not make much sense from their POV. However losing customers who have a poor experience with media streams and other time dependent data transmissions also does not make much sense. Ideally they would have huge amounts of international transit capacity so this is never an issue during peak times, however most end users are probably not willing to pay for those kind of contention ratios.

At the end of the day it’s all about maximizing end user experience, end user pricing, your network infrastructure and your margins. What needs to be realized is that:

This is so wrong. If they sell a 50 GB block to you then you are paying for tha allocated traffic, at full speed (or the speed contracted). Their network is not suffering, because they knew when they sold the data blocks, that capacity was there. And they are being paid for that. If the traffic is email, web, newsgroups, or P2P it doesn't matter it is still 50 GB, and paid for by the user/

Yes of course there is breakage, thats typically why consumers get the benefit of lower per GB pricing when buying bulk data blocks. This concept isnt just in ISP land however. Dont forget that works both ways, magin is minimised at the exact point of 50GB in this instance however if the user goes over 50GB then they most definately have an interest in trying to encourage you to spend more on overage.

Also I do state that maintaining the best end user experience possible (customer care included) is one of points of difference ISPs will use to retain customers in a competitive market.

You would have to shape to a pretty drastic amount to prevent end users from reacing 50GB given 18KB/s 24x7 over 30 days will be pretty much bang on 50GB...at which point your margin is at minimum anyhow.

freitasm:
Users are not guilty if those ISPs are stupid enough to promote "unlimited" at prices that are a joke. They should put the real price and stop with this tactic of bait and switch.

My post mentioned nothing about unlimited data plans, I agree with you here.

freitasm:
If they have no capacity then they should limit the data blocks on sale, perhaps making an auction where prices will vary depending on availability.

Or a bandwidth spot market? Bandwidth futures? Some definate pros (and cons) to this and its an interesting concept with the similarities to other commodity markets. Have discussed this at length with others in the industry, suggest it probably is OT and would justify a new thread

1 | 2 | 3 | 4