IPv6 was a Key Focus Topic at NANOG46 and Cisco Live
Submitted by Scott Hogg on Tue, 07/21/09 - 7:30pm.
Although I wasn't able to attend in person the North American Network Operators' Group (NANOG46) meeting in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on June 14 to June 17, 2009, I did review the presentations from the conference. I was astounded by the number of IPv6-related presentations at this NANOG meeting and the IPv6 presentations at Cisco Live. There were some exciting announcements made at these meetings regarding IPv6 deployments that I wanted to call your attention to. Read more
We start this week with an interesting question my friend Dan O'Neill (La Jolla, Calif.) raised in a list we both subscribe to. Dan remotely manages some 16,000 networked embedded Linux servers around the world (how cool is that?) as part of his business. Dan's problem is this:
"Where can I find a live or nearly live discussion of network outage problems? The unofficial #nanog [North American Network Operators Group] IRC channel has been overrun with kiddies for years so that's not valuable anymore.
Read more
Submitted by Layer 8 on Thu, 04/16/09 - 3:51pm.
The Federal Trade Commission today chalked up two more Do Not Call rule victories as it won fines against Comcast and Directv for not only violating that rule but for re-calling consumers who specifically had told the companies not to call them again. Read more
Submitted by Google Subnet on Thu, 01/29/09 - 8:10am.
Google's launch of M-Lab to help end users understand and identify when ISPs are throttling back performance puts some teeth behind its 'Net neutrality stance. Now, instead of waiting for researchers to uncover ISPs blocking and degrading service for things like BitTorrent, users themselves can simply use the tools to confirm (or allay) their suspicions. Read more
By Anonymous on Wed, 01/21/2009 - 4:48pm
1) is Verizon just as guilty?
2) How can I know if I reach the 250 GB limit? I don't see my usage anywhere on my statement or when I view my account online. There should be an obligation to show you where you are in relation to an imposed limit.
Click to read the article this is in response to.
By Schratboy on Thu, 09/04/2008 - 6:30am
Comcast recently imposed bandwidth limitations which is the first salvo in a pay-per-use ISP model. It's only a matter of time. With more bandwidth and dark fiber than they know what to do with, the ISPs are angling to put the frameworks in place to start up-selling their base. How many more people can connect? Once they've got saturation the only revenue growth will come from adding new services or increasing the billable time, ergo bandwidth tiers.
Hopefully, there will continue to be competition for the on-ramps and keep things competitive. But, given our government lawmakers propensity to cave to special interest, I can potentially see BIG CABLE continuing to have their way with the public whenever they feel like it.
It sort of makes me feel dirty....
Click to read the article this is in response to.
By Anonymous on Wed, 09/03/2008 - 1:05pm
"It's far more likely that the cap is in place to make sure that Comcast's network cannot be relied upon by competitors for high quality video delivery."
Spot on, I completely agree. HD content over the internet is the direction we're headed and Comcast is positioning themselves squarely in a position to control it. The cap buys them time to figure out how to prevent a transition from their carefully controlled content lineup to a free-for-all.
Click to read the article this is in response to.
By Anonymous on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 9:21pm
I use far less than the 250gig / month but I chose comcast because there were no limits advertised when I signed up. I think if 1% of the users are over the 250gig then why does a limitation need to be in place? It's yet another money grab by a company and other companies will follow suit (watch the bandwidth cap drop as well)
Click to read the article this is in response to.
Submitted by Sevcik and Wetzel on Wed, 08/13/08 - 8:57am.
The Comcast/BitTorrent saga got us thinking that the current chapter of the ‘net neutrality debate is playing out in the absence of the one thing that will lead us down a sensible path—facts. The current debate reads like a "he said, she said" script. Comcast argued that its actions to modify BitTorrent behavior were in response to a very real problem of access network congestion. But from what we can figure out there were no facts to prove a problem at all, much less one serious enough to warrant Comcast's actions. User advocates, on the other hand, argued that Comcast blocked BitTorrent around the clock, while ComCast countered that it only throttled back heavy users at peak traffic times. Who was right? Read more
By Anonymous on Thu, 08/07/2008 - 8:18am
It would appear to me that Comcast is taking a new tactic. I am a game mod developer and one of the ways I release updates to my games is through bittorrent since the files are usually small and are not illegal for someone to download.
Lately I have noticed when I turn on my bittorrent software within minutes I lose my internet connection through Comcast. I turn off the software, reset my router and everything works fine. I then turn the software back on and once again I lose the connection.
I can go hours with no problems, but the second I try to release the torrent I am booted. I find it difficult to believe this is coincidence.
Click to read the article this is in response to.
By Anonymous on Sat, 08/02/2008 - 10:13am
What protects the little guy from the "Bandwidth Hogs"?
Ever have your internet slow way down? If Comcast can not manage their network....won't this even be a bigger problem in the future?
Click to read the article this is in response to.
Submitted by Google Subnet on Thu, 07/31/08 - 12:25pm.
According to the Wall St. Journal, Google is currently planning to start its own venture capital group. If true, the move would enable Google to not only seed some interesting start-ups, but also get an early foot in the door when it comes time to purchase them or reap the rewards of a later IPO. Read more
Submitted by Sevcik and Wetzel on Wed, 07/30/08 - 7:27am.
‘Net neutrality is back in the news with an expected FCC ruling against Comcast's secret manipulation of BitTorrent traffic. We note that application performance is at the heart of the ‘net neutrality debate—it's about who can use what applications and how well they will perform. The debate is fraught with emotion and vitriol—but will approaching ‘net neutrality with a "good guy/bad guy", "us versus them" mentality of mistrust get us where we need to go? We think not because like it or not, we are all in this together.
The Comcast scenario is a sterling example of how not to do things. Read more
Submitted by Paul McNamara on Fri, 07/11/08 - 1:07pm.
Comcast's idea of network management amounts to unauthorized network manipulation, says the head of the Federal Communications Commission, who will recommend that the service provider be punished for throttling peer-to-peer traffic.
"The commission has adopted a set of principles that protects consumers access to the Internet," the commission chairman, Kevin J. Martin, told The Associated Press late Thursday. "We found that Comcast's actions in this instance violated our principles."
New York Times writer Vindu Goel notes that this apparent victory for 'Net neutrality advocates could come at a price: "Mr. Martin's proposed ruling in favor of openness could actually end up hurting Internet users if it accelerates the nascent moves by the industry to charge customers based on how much data they use instead of offering essentially unlimited data for a flat fee."
(Update: Now it seems as though by punishment Martin meant a stern talking to or perhaps a timeout; definitely not a fine or anything of that nature.)
Submitted by Google Subnet on Fri, 07/11/08 - 9:24am.
In a move that should make Google, Amazon and other proponents of 'Net neutrality happy, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin says Comcast should be punished for throttling traffic and violating free and open access to the Internet. Read more
By Jeffrey Fritz on Wed, 06/18/2008 - 9:20am
What you wrote was eerily familiar. I went through much the same song and dance with Comcast myself in San Francisco.
Their HD feed was regularly terrible with frequent video freezes, pixelation and loss of audio. Assurances that they would make this right came frequently and earnestly. And they tried--sort of. They came out and re-wired my house. It didn't help. They changed out the converter box. That didn't help either. They re-wired the feed to the vault on the street. No luck. And yes, on occasion, they would credit small portions of my bill. To be fair, once they even comped me an entire month of service. Read more
Click to read the article this is in response to.
Submitted by Jason Meserve on Fri, 06/13/08 - 12:40pm.
Cable giant Comcast usually gets a bad rep for customer service (even I complained about it), but I have to say I am impressed with their latest efforts through an unlikely source: Twitter.
Last night, while watching the incredible Celtics-Lakers game, I was trying to get some videos and podcasts uploaded to our site, but my Comcast internet connection was running terribly slow. A traceroute showed that the hop after my router was taking a whopping 1374ms to respond. Not good to say the least. So, I complained about it on my Twitter feed. Read more
