Repost in plain text... just a little too clicky on the send button folks. I'm interested in an informal poll of consumer ISP's regarding application rate-limiting. For all you folks out there managing "broadband" networks to residential end-users: Are you controlling peer-to-peer traffic in some way (i.e. rate-limiting, blocking, etc)? Do you have plans to control peer-to-peer traffic? If you don't mind, can you generally describe how you have implemented any limits and how effective those solutions are? Are you imposing other total traffic download/upload limits? Are your limits imposed via "policy" (nag your abusers) or via "network" (they get blocked automatically)? Thanks! ~Curt PCS: (913) 219-8342 Thanks! ~Curt PCS: (913) 219-8342
Are you controlling peer-to-peer traffic in some way (i.e. rate-limiting, blocking, etc)?
no
Do you have plans to control peer-to-peer traffic?
no
Are you imposing other total traffic download/upload limits?
no Additional comment: we market based on "no limits" and so far have met our expectations of doing very well against competitors that limit. I don't think limiting is viable in the long run... regards, fletcher
Since some p2p programs now use well known port numbers allocated to other things eg port 80, is it even possible to block/rate limit them? And have folks attempts at blocking caused this move to use such port numbers which imho is not a good thing.. Steve On Tue, 22 Jul 2003, Fletcher E Kittredge wrote:
Are you controlling peer-to-peer traffic in some way (i.e. rate-limiting, blocking, etc)?
no
Do you have plans to control peer-to-peer traffic?
no
Are you imposing other total traffic download/upload limits?
no
Additional comment: we market based on "no limits" and so far have met our expectations of doing very well against competitors that limit. I don't think limiting is viable in the long run...
regards, fletcher
Subject: Re: The status of consumer rate limiting? Date: Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 01:40:20AM +0100 Quoting Stephen J. Wilcox (steve@telecomplete.co.uk):
Since some p2p programs now use well known port numbers allocated to other things eg port 80, is it even possible to block/rate limit them? And have folks attempts at blocking caused this move to use such port numbers which imho is not a good thing..
I'm still waiting for a P2P system running inside IPsec. With XP and W2k making inroads on consumer computers there now is a significant user base with access to luser-friendly systems carrying these capabilities. -- Måns Nilsson Systems Specialist +46 70 681 7204 KTHNOC MN1334-RIPE He probably just wants to take over my CELLS and then EXPLODE inside me like a BARREL of runny CHOPPED LIVER! Or maybe he'd like to PSYCHOLIGICALLY TERRORISE ME until I have no objection to a RIGHT-WING MILITARY TAKEOVER of my apartment!! I guess I should call AL PACINO!
I'm still waiting for a P2P system running inside IPsec. With XP and W2k making inroads on consumer computers there now is a significant user base with access to luser-friendly systems carrying these capabilities.
I'm not positive, but I thought Filetopia used SSL transfers on port 443 for its filesharing... Eric :)
Since some p2p programs now use well known port numbers allocated to other things eg port 80, is it even possible to block/rate limit them? And have folks attempts at blocking caused this move to use such port numbers which imho is not a good thing..
As long as there are some bits in the stream that give away the ultimate application of that stream it´s possible. Using SSL / IPSEC / some proprietary protocol will degrade the detection to look for "elephant flows" but still allows for some bandwidth regulation when neccessary. To look beyond the packet you either need more sophisticated hardware or reasonable speeds, like in the gigabit range, not 10G/40G. Pete
participants (6)
-
Eric Gauthier -
Fletcher E Kittredge -
Mans Nilsson -
Owings, Curtis L [GMG] -
Petri Helenius -
Stephen J. Wilcox