Sean Donelan wrote:
So what about the other 490 people on the node expecting it to work? Do
you tell them sorry, but 10 of your neighbors are using badly behaved
applications so everything you are trying to use it for is having
problems.
Maybe Comcast should fix their broken network architecture if 10 users
sending their own data using TCP (or something else with TCP-like
congestion control) can break the 490 other people on a node.
Or get on their vendor to fix it, if they can't.
If that means traffic shaping at the CPE or very near the customer, then
perhaps that's what it means, but installing a 3rd-party box that sniffs
away and then sends forged RSTs in order to live up to its advertised
claims is clearly at the "wrong" end of the spectrum of possible solutions.
> Maybe Comcast should just tell the other 490 neighbors the 10
> names and addresses of poorly behaved P2P users and let the neighhood
> solve the problem.
Maybe Comcast's behavior will cause all 500 neighbors to find an ISP
that isn't broken. We can only hope.
Is it reasonable for your filesharing of your family photos and video
clips to cause problems for all the other users of the network? Is that
fair or just greedy?
It isn't fair or greedy, it is a bug that it does so. Greedy would be if
you were using a non-congestion-controlled protocol like most naive
RTP-based VoIP apps do.
Matthew Kaufman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
