p2pnet - rss feed: Comcast deals with BitTorrent
p2pnet news | P2P:- “Comcast Corp. promised Thursday that it would not discriminate against specific Internet traffic on its network, ending its controversial practice of targeting and blocking file-sharing technologies from San Francisco’s BitTorrent Inc. and others.”
That’s the San Francisco Chronicle.
“After criticism for allegedly blocking a popular software program for watching video online, Comcast Corp. pledged Thursday not to discriminate against specific technology as it tries to keep increasing amounts of data flowing through its cable networks,” says the Los Angeles Times.
“But the move may not be enough to keep Comcast, the country’s largest cable company, from being disciplined by federal regulators or to resolve a complicated debate about how Internet providers can manage their online traffic.”
It’s all about America’s largest cable TV and Internet provider saying it’ll use BitTorrent “and other companies” offering P2P file-sharing, “to come up with improved ways to speed large files efficiently,” states the story, going on:
“Comcast said it would still manage traffic during peak periods but by year’s end would not block specific applications - a recent practice that prompted federal scrutiny and pressure.”
Still manage traffic during peak periods, eh?
Networking and protocol expert Robb Topolski isn’t impressed.
“Comcast and BitTorrent seems to have solved world hunger - and I’d love nothing more than to be optimistic about it,” he says. “But I cannot be. As they say on Slashdot - show video, or it didn’t happen.
“This deal is treachery, relies on how much we can trust the word of Comcast, and leaves the public interests out in the cold.”
In October, 2007, Topolksi spotted Comcast using an application from Canadian broadband management company Sandvine to throttle BitTorrent traffic.
“I was having a problem uploading on Gnutella in early 2007,” he says. “I tracked it down to Comcast using Sandvine-injected RST packets and documented it. Blog stories led to press stories which led to independent confirmation. And here we are today.”
It took a while but then the same thing is happening in Canada with Bell Sympatico, caught red-handed throttling traffic.
No doubt it’ll eventually reach similar conclusions to Comcast.
p2pnet wrote about it first last year and to use Topolski’s words, “Blog stories led to press stories which led to independent confirmation. And here we are today.”
On the Comcast farce, Topolski goes on >>>
I think it’s strange that anyone believes a word that Comcast says.
This is the Comcast that:
1. Told the FCC in 2005 that they would not degrade traffic in order to convince the FCC that network neutrality regulations were not needed.
2. Started degrading P2P traffic the very next year, and failed to tell anyone what they were doing.
3. Used a system that utilized forgery, and successfully placed blame on the other peer instead of Comcast.
4. Denied it when caught.
5. Then changed their story when the denials were not believed, but still never came out and said what they were doing.
6. Then they justified their actions by throwing their other Cable-Internet brothers and sisters under the bus with their “they do it too!” defense
7. Then stealthily changed the AUP days before an FCC filing where they referred to the new provisions.
8. When the changed AUP started getting press attention, they stated that a prominent story on Comcast.net alerted millions of visitors of the change and accused Marvin Ammori of crying wolf. (Google cache proved that nothing alerted users to the changed AUP until the day after the press started asking questions.)
9. Then they packed the Harvard FCC hearing.
This company has not demonstrated that you can trust its promises, nor can you believe its assertions. Comcast just used BitTorrent Inc. as a tool to try and defang the FCC.
BitTorrent Inc. is a content provider. Vuze, who actually DID make a complaint and petition to the FCC, is a competitor. Neither BitTorrent, Vuze, nor Comcast represents the interests of 12 million Comcast users nor the The Internet Society nor the public. And this middle-of-the-night deal was made without their input.
Nothing has changed. The RST interference continues. It was a wrongful act. BitTorrent Inc. has no right making a deal with Comcast allowing it to continue to commit wrongful acts until it finally decides it is ready to stop. The correct relief is to stop the interference immediately and to FULLY DISCLOSE what it did and to accept responsibility for those actions. (Even today, Comcast’s Policy VP refused to answer questions about the interference.)
Their word is worthless. Until the interference stops, I have no reason to believe it will. Until either meaningful competition returns to broadband, or until sufficient government regulation enforces Network Neutrality, we have no reason to think that this agreement will last …..
Stay tuned.
San Francisco Chronicle - Comcast changes tune, won’t block large files, March 28, 2008
Los Angeles Times - Comcast relents on Web video, March 28, 2008
spotted Comcast - Unlocking the Comcast handcuffs, October 22, 2007
caught red-handed - Bell download throttling: update, March 27, 2008
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe
to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile - http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.phpNet access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details. Download here.
March 28th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
Would these supposed peak times be an east or west coast time zone?, or would it be based on a given hemisphere?. I don’t trust the “official” bit torrent app and I doubt that any open source versions would be tolerated on the network.
April 2nd, 2008 at 12:34 am
…Comcast also degrades their HD content on TV..