Post Tagged with: "traffic management"

U.S. Net Neutrality Bill Big Leap Over Canadian Law

Last week, Congressional Representatives Ed Markey and Anna Eshoo introduced the Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2009.  Public Knowledge provides a great rundown of the net neutrality bill.  While some have suggested that the bill merely allows the U.S. to catch up to Canada, a closer look reveals that the bill would move the U.S. far beyond Canada in dealing with net neutrality issues as it directly addresses many of the issues raised during the CRTC network management hearing.  In particular:

1.   Traffic management guidelines. It establishes a reasonable network management traffic management guidelines similar to those proposed by the OIC and CIPPIC.  The bill states:

a network management practice is a reasonable practice only if it furthers a critically important interest, is narrowly tailored to further that interest, and is the means of furthering that interest that is the least restrictive, least discriminatory, and least constricting of consumer choice available.

This is not current Canadian law, though the CRTC has been asked to adopt something very similar.

2.   Transparency.  The bill requires full public disclosure of traffic management practices, something opposed by some ISPs at the traffic management proceeding.  The bill states:

each Internet access service provider shall provide to consumers and make publicly available detailed information about such services, including information about the speed, nature, and limitations of such services. Each Internet access service provider must publicly disclose, at a minimum, network management practices that affect communications between a user and a content, application, or service provider in the ordinary, routine use of such broadband service.

This bill would provide far greater mandated transparency than that found in Canada.

Read more ›

August 12, 2009 5 comments News

BitTorrent Speaks: Correcting the Record in CRTC Net Neutrality Hearing

BitTorrent has shaken up the CRTC network management hearing with a late submission [no online link yet] that seeks to set the record straight on BitTorrent and its impact on ISP networks.  The company begins by noting:

Our company, more specifically our BitTorrent application, has been referred to repeatedly in various submissions in this proceeding.  From these submissions, there appears to be some misconceptions as to the effect of BitTorrent, as well as in general peer-to-peer (“P2P”)  applications, on the Internet and in fact there has been an overstatement of the effect of such
applications on network congestion.  

After describing BitTorrent (the company and the application), the submission addresses several misconceptions:

  • Shaw argued that the high number of connections with P2P subverts the fairness of TCP.  BitTorrent says this is incorrect, since very few connections (4 – 5) are used at any one time.
  • Rogers argued that users do not care about upload performances.  BitTorrent says this is inaccurate given the correlation between download and upload for BitTorrent users.
  • Cogeco argues that P2P is not a real-time or interactive application.  BitTorrent says this too is false since some apps like Skype are clearly interactive and some BitTorrent clients supports streaming.
  • Rogers argued that P2P can create 24/7 always on usage.  BitTorrent says this is exxagerated with the average client only active around 4 days per month.

BitTorrent then focuses on the effect of Canadian traffic management practices on the application's performance.  The two main paragraphs are worth quoting in full since they have major implications beyond just the CRTC as BitTorrent states that movie executives report that Canadian P2P usage has declined dramatically over the past year.  The comment:

Read more ›

July 28, 2009 16 comments News

Questions For Bell

CRTC Chair Konrad von Finckenstein closed today's session of the network management hearing by noting that the "Bell interrogation" will begin tomorrow morning. With Bell the final party to appear, the previous six days have raised many questions in need of answers.  I've posted some below.  Readers should feel free to add here or post to Twitter (#q4bell).

Traffic management

  • Your disclosure statement indicates that you shape from 4:30 pm to 2:00 am?  Why not more specifically during periods of congestion?
  • Your online disclosure does not specify the reduction in speeds due to shaping.  What are they?
  • Rogers claims that P2P causes congestion at all times.  Do you have a different experience?
  • Many major carriers from both DSL and cable do not traffic shape at all.  Why the difference?
  • Do you traffic shape upload and download or just upload?
  • What are the minimum speeds for upload (Shaw's are 80 kilobits/sec)?
  • What percentage of bandwidth is reserved for P2P traffic (Shaw is 30%)?
  • What percentage of your users are active P2P users?
  • Is the shaping the same for all customers regardless of the tiered service?
  • Do you shape wireless data services?
  • Have you tried economic approaches (ie. Videotron's caps) to address congestion?
  • What would be your costs to adopt the Comcast approach?
  • Have you considered the Juniper technology of customer controlled prioritization?
  • How do you address the privacy concerns associated with DPI?
  • Do you have any information on the throttling experience raised by the CFTPA presentation?

Read more ›

July 13, 2009 32 comments News