Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Internet

Hunting the Mythical "Bandwidth Hog" 497

eldavojohn writes "Benoit Felten, an analyst in Paris, has heard enough of the elusive creature known as the bandwidth hog. Like its cousin the Boogie Man, the 'bandwidth hog' is a tale that ISPs tell their frightened users to keep them in check or to cut off whoever they want to cut off from service. And Felten's calling them out because he's certain that bandwidth hogs don't exist. What's actually happening is the ISPs are selecting the top 5% of users, by volume of bits that move on their wire, and revoking their service, even if they aren't negatively impacting other users. Which means that they are targeting 'heavy users' simply for being 'heavy users.' Felten has thrown down the gauntlet asking for a standardized data set from any telco that he can do statistical analysis on that will allow him to find any evidence of a single outlier ruining the experience for everyone else. Unlikely any telco will take him up on that offer but his point still stands." Felten's challenge is paired with a more technical look at how networks operate, which claims that TCP/IP by its design eliminates the possibility of hogging bandwidth. But Wes Felter corrects that mis-impression in a post to a network neutrality mailing list.
The Internet

uTorrent To Build In Transfer-Throttling Ability 187

vintagepc writes "TorrentFreak reports that a redesign of the popular BitTorrent client uTorrent allows clients to detect network congestion and automatically adjust the transfer rates, eliminating the interference with other Internet-enabled applications' traffic. In theory, the protocol senses congestion based on the time it takes for a packet to reach its destination, and by intelligent adjustments, should reduce network traffic without causing a major impact on download speeds and times. As said by Simon Morris (from TFA), 'The throttling that matters most is actually not so much the download but rather the upload – as bandwidth is normally much lower UP than DOWN, the up-link will almost always get congested before the down-link does.' Furthermore, the revision is designed to eliminate the need for ISPs to deal with problems caused by excessive BitTorrent traffic on their networks, thereby saving them money and support costs. Apparently, the v2.0b client using this protocol is already being used widely, and no major problems have been reported."

Comment The issue could well be competition... (Score 1) 656

I think that bandwidth caps are a slightly stupid way for ISPs to look at what they sell and why people buy it. I think that things will change, especially as decent bandwidth becomes available in the last mile. A few months ago I posted about pricing models and how they might evolve: http://www.fiberevolution.com/2008/03/ruminations-abo.html I think, ultimately, that the issue is about competition. If given the choice, customers will favour non-capped offers over capped offers, so apping only happens if there's too little competition or if all available options involve capping. What I find surprising is that in a capped ecosystem (ie. every ISP offers capped only) it only takes one player to launch a non-capped acquisition strategy. I'd be curious to understand why none of the Australian ISPs (to take an examble of an all-capped country, as far as i can tell) have decided to acquire customers using that argument as marketing...

Slashdot Top Deals

Term, holidays, term, holidays, till we leave school, and then work, work, work till we die. -- C.S. Lewis

Working...