| Author |
FCC finaly punishes Comcast |
Eledore Massis [R33]
Grand Admiral
Templar Knights
Joined: May 26, 2002
Posts: 2694
From: tsohlacoLocalhost
|  Posted: 2008-08-04 14:17
Quote:
| On 2008-08-04 08:36, Deltaflyer wrote:
I still have no idea whats going on... |
|
Short:
Comcast a US Internet Provider was throttling connections of its users.
most noted where the Torrent connections.
Manny and most people found this offensive since they payed for something they did not receive.
some even interpreted that comcast deliberately was trying to deny one form of activity and freedom.
The FCC (Federal Communications Commission) of the USA is investigating how far a ISP (Internet Service Providers) can go as for managing there network.
Comcast is the first to receive some form of punishment because they where actively disturbing there customers p2p connections.
Look up "Net Neutrality"
_________________
DS Discordion
|
Deltabacon
Fleet Admiral
Joined: August 17, 2007
Posts: 395
From: Liverpool, Great Britain
| Posted: 2008-08-04 16:14
Oh ok thanks eledore 
_________________
|
Little Pet Slinki
Admiral
Joined: April 16, 2006
Posts: 836
From: United Kingdom, South West.
| Posted: 2008-08-04 21:07
Awesome! I wonder if it will have any bearing on the UK plans for internet usage.
_________________
|
Veronw
Marshal
Joined: December 13, 2004
Posts: 554
| Posted: 2008-08-05 17:50
someone want to tell me if this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HughesNet#Fair_Access_Policy
would be against Net Nuetrality please? if so, please send that to them (if anyone can) cus id love to see hughes net recieve the same fate as comcast
_________________
|
Eledore Massis [R33]
Grand Admiral
Templar Knights
Joined: May 26, 2002
Posts: 2694
From: tsohlacoLocalhost
| Posted: 2008-08-06 15:56
Quote:
| On 2008-08-05 17:50, Veronw wrote:
someone want to tell me if this <HughesNet.. ... would be against Net Nuetrality please? |
|
This can't directly be seen as net neutrality, since it is part of the service your renting/paying for.
The throttling HughesNet applies is for all connectivity you are preforming on that connectio.
Even if you should object to something like that, or drag some kind of court case, most likely they will just point to the FAP and say you agreed to it.
Unfortinatly there are only a few satellite ISP's that are worth there buck for normal consumers. As always i never recommend those, unless there is absolutely no other option available.
In europe almost all ISP's have something like HughesNet FAP, around here there falled FUP (Fair User Policy).
They are a agreement that you won't exceedingly use your connection, and in the case that you do, you will accept extra charges or discontinuation of contract if you cease to accept terms from your ISP.
They however don't have a fixed bandwidth limit stated in them. But behind the scenes the ISP calculates the total amount of estimated bandwidth they should buy-in according to the amount of clients they have.
(Usually its around 10/15% of the total capacity all users could generate in a 24 hour period)
(Buying in beforehand is crucial since The local/national Internet exchainge can load balancing the data beforehand. not buying in enough can lead to extra charges or fines.)
If there estimated value is overtaken they usually start to search for the highest users that month, the actions taken after that depends on the ISP's user policy.
Hope this insight helps a bit.
I know the last part wasn't relative to the subject but, it gives a idea why ISP's give bandwidth cap's.
p.s.
I know i take it to the extreme but ill share it.
My last month's usage was:
Upstream: 86.394 Gb
Downstream: 104.041 Gb
_________________
DS Discordion
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
