Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Technology and Science News › [CBC]Bell to scale back throttling of file-sharing
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[CBC]Bell to scale back throttling of file-sharing

post #1 of 27
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Bell says it may stop slowing downloads and uploads of files shared by customers through peer-to-peer applications.

Source

Yay for Canadians using Bell? redface.gif
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
[ Q6600 2.4GHz ] [ ASUS P5K ] [ Radeon HD5830 ] [ 4GB 800MHz ] 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
[ WD 500GB SATA ] [ DVD Burner/Reader 16x ] [ W7 Ultimate x64 ] [ Viewsonic 19" ] 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft [ 600W ] [ Antec 900 ] Microsoft 
Mouse Pad
Desk 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
[ Q6600 2.4GHz ] [ ASUS P5K ] [ Radeon HD5830 ] [ 4GB 800MHz ] 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
[ WD 500GB SATA ] [ DVD Burner/Reader 16x ] [ W7 Ultimate x64 ] [ Viewsonic 19" ] 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft [ 600W ] [ Antec 900 ] Microsoft 
Mouse Pad
Desk 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2 of 27
That will be nice for those who play games where the developer shares their patch updates via P2P such as Blizzard.
post #3 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Birdy1337;15393646 
Source

Yay for Canadians using Bell? redface.gif

Although I despise the practice, I understand why they do it; all too many people out there utilizing P2P lack the knowledge to do so, and end up slaying networks in the process.
post #4 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlells01;15393697 
Although I despise the practice, I understand why they do it; all too many people out there utilizing P2P lack the knowledge to do so, and end up slaying networks in the process.

You're wrong. It has been proven that the application of ITMPs by Bell are purely for economic purposes, as congestion is not consistently bad enough to warrant the level of throttling they engaged in. Bell essentially had torrents throttled to a useless level from 3pm-2am just because. The CRTC is now pushing back on these practices as they violate the regulations set forth with regards to ITMPs and it's now getting the attention of the public. This is merely them responding to almost a year of bad press re: their internet business line.

As an aside -- how would a lack of functional knowledge of P2P protocols cause users to "slay the network", as you put it? Torrents are idiot-proof, literally fire and forget unless you need to use specific ports. VoD services (Netflix, Youtube, etc.) now consume far and away more bandwidth than torrents on their network, and the house of cards hasn't crumbled yet. "Congestion" was an excuse to interfere with how people use their services.
Edited by Dyslexyc - 10/21/11 at 7:44am
post #5 of 27
Not going to make much of a differance. If anything more people will get hit with overage charges due the the 20 and 60 gb caps still being in place depending on your plan.

I'm glad I'm not with them anymore.
i7 3820
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 3820 AsRock X79 Extreme6 Sapphire 6950 2gb Sapphire 6950 2gb 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 16GB (4 x 4GB)  Crucial M4 128gb LG HD-DVD/Blu-Ray Combo Drive Corsair H80 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Pro 64bit Samsung XL2370 Cooler Master Quick Fire (cherry blues) Corsair TX850M 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Fractal Define R3 SS Xai SS 4HD Asus Xonar Essence ST 
  hide details  
Reply
i7 3820
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 3820 AsRock X79 Extreme6 Sapphire 6950 2gb Sapphire 6950 2gb 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 16GB (4 x 4GB)  Crucial M4 128gb LG HD-DVD/Blu-Ray Combo Drive Corsair H80 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Pro 64bit Samsung XL2370 Cooler Master Quick Fire (cherry blues) Corsair TX850M 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Fractal Define R3 SS Xai SS 4HD Asus Xonar Essence ST 
  hide details  
Reply
post #6 of 27
Thread Starter 
The caps are too low with Bell. Like they offer 20-25GBs and also 60GB, Then if you want more, You have to buy an addon package which I sadly HAD to do because usage charges I was being attacked with. 120GB/15$ a month. I'm paying like $60 a month basically if you round it off and I'm getting 6Mbps (700kb/s or around that). It's sad how Bell doesn't really have a good internet line. I'm thinking about switching soon.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
[ Q6600 2.4GHz ] [ ASUS P5K ] [ Radeon HD5830 ] [ 4GB 800MHz ] 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
[ WD 500GB SATA ] [ DVD Burner/Reader 16x ] [ W7 Ultimate x64 ] [ Viewsonic 19" ] 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft [ 600W ] [ Antec 900 ] Microsoft 
Mouse Pad
Desk 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
[ Q6600 2.4GHz ] [ ASUS P5K ] [ Radeon HD5830 ] [ 4GB 800MHz ] 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
[ WD 500GB SATA ] [ DVD Burner/Reader 16x ] [ W7 Ultimate x64 ] [ Viewsonic 19" ] 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft [ 600W ] [ Antec 900 ] Microsoft 
Mouse Pad
Desk 
  hide details  
Reply
post #7 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dyslexyc;15393802 
You're wrong. It has been proven that the application of ITMPs by Bell are purely for economic purposes.

Uh..just because they do it for economic reasoning doesn't mean I'm wrong. As a matter of fact, that's why any carrier would do it - to ensure equitable bandwidth allocation to all customers.

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/public/partvii/2008/8622/c51_200805153/890988.zip
post #8 of 27
^
Bell/Rogers has been upping bandwidth caps but nowhere near as usable at cost efficient pricing for most households. Teksavvy might offer unlimited and 300GB bandwidth limits but problems plague the cable side of things and DSL is hindered with only a 300GB cap with high costs. There is little choice/incentives.

It's funny how the majority of the problems centralizes around Eastern Canada (not the Maritimes) with the duopoly in place. When I move back from university in London to Vancouver, I get Shaw 100/5 connection with 500GB of bandwidth+Cable+Phone Line for only $120/month. I pay the same right now in Ontario for 32/1 (150GB bandwidth) and basic cable.

It might be a move in the right direction but Ontarians have a heck of a battle to fight.
 
Uni. PC
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 3820 @ 4.5GHz Gigabyte X79-UD5 Gigabyte Windforce GTX670 4 x 4GB G.Skill Ripjaws X 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
120GB Pyro SE+2x2TB Caviar Black+2x2TB Caviar G... Pioneer DVR-217 Corsair H80 Windows 7 x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell u2711 Das Ultimate S-S/Noppoo Choc Mini/Razer Black W... Seasonic x-760 Corsair 600T SE White 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G502/Logitech G700/Logitech MX1100 Steelseries I-2 White Glass Creative Titanium HD 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 2600K @ 4.6GHz (~1.3v) Asus P8P67 Pro eVGA GTX470 16GB RipJaws X 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Corsair F60 SSD+2x1TB Cav. Black+2x2TB Cav. Green Pioneer DVR-217 Windows 7 x64 Dell u2311h 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer BWU/Noppoo Choc Mini XFX 750w Black Edition NZXT Phantom White Logitech G5/Razer Imperator 4G 
Mouse Pad
Steelseries Experience I-2 
  hide details  
Reply
 
Uni. PC
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 3820 @ 4.5GHz Gigabyte X79-UD5 Gigabyte Windforce GTX670 4 x 4GB G.Skill Ripjaws X 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
120GB Pyro SE+2x2TB Caviar Black+2x2TB Caviar G... Pioneer DVR-217 Corsair H80 Windows 7 x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell u2711 Das Ultimate S-S/Noppoo Choc Mini/Razer Black W... Seasonic x-760 Corsair 600T SE White 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G502/Logitech G700/Logitech MX1100 Steelseries I-2 White Glass Creative Titanium HD 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 2600K @ 4.6GHz (~1.3v) Asus P8P67 Pro eVGA GTX470 16GB RipJaws X 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Corsair F60 SSD+2x1TB Cav. Black+2x2TB Cav. Green Pioneer DVR-217 Windows 7 x64 Dell u2311h 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer BWU/Noppoo Choc Mini XFX 750w Black Edition NZXT Phantom White Logitech G5/Razer Imperator 4G 
Mouse Pad
Steelseries Experience I-2 
  hide details  
Reply
post #9 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlells01;15393890 
Uh..just because they do it for economic reasoning doesn't mean I'm wrong. As a matter of fact, that's why any carrier would do it - to ensure equitable bandwidth allocation to all customers.

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/public/partvii/2008/8622/c51_200805153/890988.zip

No, you're not wrong simply because they do it for a reason other than why you stated; you're also wrong because their network has done just fine with the explosion of on-demand video services online not making their network grind to a halt. Instead of re-investing in their networks to improve capacity, they're opted to throttle speeds to prevent their networks from being "congested". No matter how you shake it, the throttling was never to prevent "slaying the networks". It was to enable them to rest on their laurels and not reinvest the massive profits they've been earning to improve the customer experience.

The only reason they got away with it on P2P traffic is because it's in a legal and ethical grey area that no one wanted to wade into. Try throttling netflix and see how the general public reacts.
post #10 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dyslexyc;15394061 
No, you're not wrong simply because they do it for a reason other than why you stated; you're also wrong because their network has done just fine with the explosion of on-demand video services online not making their network grind to a halt. Instead of re-investing in their networks to improve capacity, they're opted to throttle speeds to prevent their networks from being "congested". No matter how you shake it, the throttling was never to prevent "slaying the networks". It was to enable them to rest on their laurels and not reinvest the massive profits they've been earning to improve the customer experience.

The only reason they got away with it on P2P traffic is because it's in a legal and ethical grey area that no one wanted to wade into. Try throttling netflix and see how the general public reacts.

doh.gif

I'm assuming you didn't even bother reading the documents I provided:

"Last fall, before the Company began deployment of its Internet traffic management solution to ease network congestion during peak usage periods, 5% of users were generating 60% of total traffic on the network and 60% of that traffic was P2P traffic, including BitTorrent. During peak periods, that same 5% of users were utilizing 33% of available bandwidth. In other words, 95% of Bell subscribers were being negatively impacted by a very small minority of Internet users primarily using P2P file sharing applications.

As a result of the application of its Internet traffic management solution, the Company has observed a 50% reduction in total P2P traffic during peak periods and a decrease in the number of congested links. The Company has also observed that other types of traffic such as web browsing, and audio or video streaming, previously impacted by congestion at peak periods, has quickly filled the bandwidth made available through the use of Internet traffic management therefore improving the customer online experience for such interactive and real-time activities."
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Technology and Science News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Technology and Science News › [CBC]Bell to scale back throttling of file-sharing