Comcast backs off BitTorrent, will continue to manage internet traffic

Although Comcast has been beating around the proverbial bush about its data-meddling ways, it seems the pressure from the recent FCC investigation efforts have forced it to play nice. Reportedly, the firm is getting set to (begrudgingly, we presume) announce that it will "stop targeting BitTorrent on the internet." More specifically, the cable company will purportedly "boost broadband capacity" in order to make things speedier all around, but details on this tidbit were unsurprisingly absent. Nevertheless, BitTorrent has also agreed to make its software "more efficient," but those hoping that Comcast would leave well enough alone are in for even more disappointment. The outfit still plans on managing traffic on the 'net (standard practice, we know), but Tony Werner, executive VP and CTO, noted that it was "working hard on a different approach that is protocol-agnostic during peak periods."

[Thanks, Mike and Kenneth]

[tom @ Mar 27th 2008 10:11AM]

Did the VP get visited by a ghost in dream causing a change of heart?

[facebookfake @ Mar 27th 2008 11:34AM]

Yea, the FCC ghost of fining-your-ass in the future.

[Smart People Play Tuba @ Mar 27th 2008 10:12AM]

Your headline made me do a double-take. In news items, "lays off" typically means "terminates employment." For a second there, it sounded like Comcast was "firing" BitTorrent. ("huh?")

[Jason @ Mar 27th 2008 10:23AM]

Now lets see if we get decent speed upgrades...384 kbps up is horrendous...and their "6 Mbps down" is absolute bull. You NEVER get that, even in short bursts. With Optimum we had 5 Mbps down, 2 Mbps up...and it was actually that 99% of the time.

Wake up Comcast...your so called Broadband speeds are crap compared to everyone else.

[shanoboy @ Mar 27th 2008 10:33AM]

The Comcast uploads are pathetic and I rarely get the maxed out downspeeds too.

And as far as traffic management goes, I think they're referring to that 200 gig/month cap they put on your broadband connection before they send you a notice telling you they're about to ban you.

200 gig/month is a lot of bandwidth, but advertising and paying for unlimited access should come with unlimited access.

[OneLove @ Mar 27th 2008 11:04AM]

I get 6mbps 100% of the time.

[James Yopp @ Mar 27th 2008 12:21PM]

6MB works ... rarely. I only get 6Mbps when I'm downloading SUPER-common files that are in ComCAST's local cache. It's a 6Mbps link speed, but unless you're downloading the newest version of Firefox, you won't ever see it in your browser. My guess is that the stuff that actually gets cached to d/l that fast are things like Windows Updates, iPod firmwares, and virus definition files. Nothing else would be common enough to have made it onto the local accelerator cache.

Plus, ComCAST has this ultra-terrible habit of throttling everything. I recently downloaded a 2GB file through Akamai (the iPhone SDK), and it was close to 6Mbps at the onset, but before it was 50% complete, it had been throttled down to less than 167KB/s -- 1.5Mbps. Sometimes, long-running SSH sessions are throttled so badly that the keyboard locks up for >= 2sec at a time as packets are 'delayed'.

To ComCAST: I have no problem playing nice. But tell me how much bandwidth I can reasonably use at a time, and DO NOT throttle down past some minimum speed. Introducing latency or "delaying" packets is an embarrassingly bad thing to do to your customers, and it makes your network look totally broken.

[mike @ Mar 27th 2008 3:10PM]

Not everyone has problems with throttling, though. We pay for the 6Mb service and get an average of 1MB/s when downloading torrents.

[Tony Rayo @ Mar 27th 2008 4:24PM]

I recommend you go back to OOL. I have a friend who works closely with their engineering department and they have 15mbit/5mbit connections and are testing 50mbit and even 100mbit (although 100mbit will require DOCSIS 3.0). But yeah, if I lived in the NJ area or wherever OOL covers these days I would switch to them in a heartbeat from Comcast (which keeps jacking up their price). To be fair, when I first got the service some 5 or so years ago the upload speed was 128kbit... now it's 386kb but I think they should be providing at least 1mbit for what they charge.

Just wait a ~year or so (2 years for people that for some reason lives in a county that gets the updates last) for DOCSIS 3.0 backend systems to rollout and we will be living in happier times.

[aardvark sandwich @ Mar 27th 2008 10:25AM]

Dear Comcast,

Enclosed is this month's payment for high speed internet.

Please leave it turned on this month.

K, tkx, bai.

[Jason @ Mar 27th 2008 10:32AM]

People use the BitTorrent program still? The people Comcast really wants to "stop" are the ones that are using programs that go above and beyond that of BitTorrent.

[shanoboy @ Mar 27th 2008 1:05PM]

Am I missing something? Is there already a successor to bittorrent. Please enlighten me. I don't know what you're referring to.

[JB87 @ Mar 27th 2008 1:35PM]

Programs or clients, not protocols. μTorrent, Azureus, BitTornado, etc. I found the original BitTorrent client very lacking when I used it.

[Tony Rayo @ Mar 27th 2008 4:28PM]

Usenet provides 95% of my downloading needs these days. Of course it's not free, so that turns people off. For people on a budget like me I recommend Newshosting's Unlimited service, 15$/month (less if you pre-pay for a year which I do). However if you have a little more cash then the best unlimited service is from Giganews.

http://www.newshosting.com
http://www.giganews.com

[Jason @ Mar 27th 2008 8:08PM]

I guess you didnt catch the fact that I said "program". I wasnt talking about the acutal P2P protocol.

BitTorrent the program (I would think) is hardly used by the people that Comcast is really trying to prevent from downloading files.

[DWells55 @ Mar 27th 2008 10:40AM]

It's about time I got to actually seed Ubuntu after I downloaded it instead of getting all my outgoing connections reset and made to feel like a leech. I still don't like Comcast though and when it comes time for me to move, I'm basing where I move to on whether or not there's an alternative to Comcast for both television and internet access. As if Comcast's spotty internet service weren't enough, the HD television channels are so heavily compressed at times that I'm actually better off downloading shows in HD and streaming them to my 360. I'm probably gonna have to run out and buy an antenna to use just for watching my primetime TV shows in HD without all the Comcast compression.

[a ham sandwich @ Mar 27th 2008 10:47AM]

BitTorrent has also agreed to make its software "more efficient"

Uh,
a.) there are a ton of clients for bittorrent so hows that work? and
b.) does one single organization "make" bittorrent?

can someone here clarify how bittorrent can "respond" to comcast? is it not open source?

[Tony Rayo @ Mar 27th 2008 4:39PM]

It can be kind of confusing nowadays. There is an official BitTorrent client, and in fact a company behind it called "BitTorrent Inc." created from the work of Bram Cohen, the person who invented the BT protocol. Those are the people in talks with Comcast. Other clients base their program off of the basics of this protocol, but also are more often adding in their own additions or break off into non-official BT controlled channels (such as DHT circles... I believe Azureus still has the largest group of connected users).

If you want to know more, here is a link of the actual press release from BitTorrent Inc. - http://www.bittorrent.com/about/press/comcast-and-bittorrent-form-collaboration-to-address-network-management-network-architecture-and-content-distribution?csrc=splash

[aMp 732 @ Mar 27th 2008 11:02AM]

Bittorent is a protocol, People use ' bittorent clients ' that allow you to use that protocol.

[ML @ Mar 27th 2008 11:09AM]

I wish Comcast would just go away.

[aMp 732 @ Mar 27th 2008 11:54AM]

To be honest - With Comcast I have figured out a pretty good solution that works good..

uTorrent ( use encryption and note your port )
iPFW Firewall ( basically IP TABLES for Windows )

Add the rule " ipfw add deny tcp from any to any ( your port ) in tcpflags rst "

And enjoy your downloads..

I have no problems now seeding and downloading.

Daryl

[Fanfoot @ Mar 27th 2008 2:13PM]

Don't see how this would work. The resets aren't coming from your torrent software. They're being sent by Comcast AS IF they came from you. Don't know where the resets originate, but presumably from some piece of filtering equipment Comcast has in their head end lab, not from your home. So IPFW can't do anything about that...

[Fanfoot @ Mar 27th 2008 1:58PM]

Not saying Comcast isn't throttling, but it isn't Comcast's throttling that is locking up your keyboard. You have some kind of glitch in your system, or a badly written application...

[Harkonian @ Mar 27th 2008 1:00PM]

I don't understand how anyone is happy about this. He said they are "working hard on a different approach that is protocol-agnostic during peak periods." Protocol-agnostic, as in it doesn't differentiate between any protocols. In other words, they will treat all protocols equally crappily whether it be BitTorrent, FTP, HTTP, or IGOTTAP.

That's ComCastic!

[bernardino @ Mar 27th 2008 1:11PM]

Hopefully they'll throttle individual users speeds so that those just surfing the web won't have their web slow to a crawl because another use is torrenting his/her connection to death.

My gut tells me that the real problem is that they are advertising X Mpbs speeds and then oversubscribing their lines. They need to advertise using real-world speeds so that we feel like we are getting what we pay for. They also need to increase their available bandwidth so that they can consequently advertise higher speeds.

[K @ Mar 27th 2008 1:02PM]

Weird, I get a consistant 750+KBps on the newsgroups... That's close to 6Mbps... It actually spikes higher intially (For like 5 seconds) and then it settles out to about 750KBps...

[ArmySyko @ Mar 27th 2008 3:27PM]

I consistantly get 6Mbps through Newsgroups.

[Tony Rayo @ Mar 27th 2008 4:45PM]

Usenet is nice because you are often using multiple connections/threads to download the same file, so it's very easy to max out your connection using a good provider.

[Scott Miller @ Mar 27th 2008 1:09PM]

Look into this a different way. It's in the details.

Bittorrent the network
Bittorrent the company

This may be a "reversal" on Comcasts part, but with Bittorrent the company. Not the network, at least in whole. Bittorrent authorized torrents will get a boost, But, unauthorized torrents will still be restricted. Remember, BIttorrent is a company looking to make money, allowing people to share unauthorized torrents will be a "gift" to the public (albeit, limited). You should thank them.

[Nutsy @ Mar 27th 2008 1:17PM]

Oh how times have changed.... I remember the early days of bittorrent... When Bittorrent was anything but...

[ZeroCorpse @ Mar 27th 2008 1:27PM]

My 6Mbps DSL is fine. AT&T aren't exactly "the good guys" but they never send threatening letters from the MPAA, and they don't send email notices telling me I have used too much bandwidth. I've been on AT&T DSL for many years now, and the only frustration I've had from them is dealing with their annoying, ignorant, useless level-1 tech support (haughty, condescending people in India reading from scripts and being rude) -but once I get back to the local people, they tend not to be a problem.

[AndrewNeo @ Mar 27th 2008 9:27PM]

I have 6mb DSL from AT&T and I love it. The only problem I've had is like you've said, Tier 1 tech support. When it's a problem on their end, I don't want to have to restart my modem six times..

[Ubuntu 7.10 WindowsXP @ Mar 27th 2008 2:08PM]

I don't download during peek hours. I use Bit-torrent to catch up on TV shows I missed (not getting into that debate about legal or not). They still restricted the torrent bandwidth. To me this all sounds like a bunch of smoke and mirrors to get people's attention off of them. They are still going to choke it during peek hours.

[peshue @ Mar 27th 2008 3:08PM]

They probably found about the Azureus plugin meant solely to monitor isps meddling with bt trafic. And thet there would be oodles of proof that they were disconnecting seeds, slimy bastards.

[avidracer @ Mar 27th 2008 3:55PM]

corect me if i'm wrong: what comcast means is: alright! I've had enough of my customer in that position, so i'm going to switch the angle and aim for penertration in a different position.
correct?

[happy_penguin @ Mar 27th 2008 4:05PM]

Comcast can suck it.

[Jonny @ Mar 27th 2008 4:24PM]

Too little too late Comcast.

I, and I'm sure many others are tired of your business practices and bullying your customers.

I personally dumped you for Verizon FiOS. 15Mbps down, 2Mbps up. Much faster, much more reliable, and I haven't had any throttling of speeds.

[bsm0f0 @ Mar 27th 2008 4:55PM]

I've been with Comcast for a long time, and the only thing that's changed on my "package" are a few channel swaps and the "turbo boost" to my internet package ... meanwhile my bill has gone from $64 for both to almost $120 (118.61) for both.

I'd pick up another provider in a heartbeat if DSL wasn't 128/128 here and/or satellite (which now uses dsl) was worth a shit. As it is ... I live smack in the middle of a major city and I'm fucked. FIOS can't get here soon enough ... then again, it's been "coming soon" for almost 3 years now =/

For the record ... I live in South Boston (yes, the Boston city limits).

[IndiaTech @ Mar 27th 2008 5:14PM]

Let me check...
File Size: 699 MB
Download Speed: 0.3kbps
Seeds / Peers: 1452 / 3342
Time Remaining: 3d:14:23:33

Nopes... Still not working. FCC needs to work hard here or hire Tony Soprano to convince Comcast here.

[phanbouy @ Mar 27th 2008 7:25PM]

why no FiOS in San Francisco? damn you crapcast, damn you! (for the record I've been satisfied with ATT DSL for the most part thus far)

[Bill @ Mar 27th 2008 10:22PM]

This is great, isn't it. It lets those that know what their talking about, the operators and the applications, come to a solution that is compatible with the network architecture. It doesn't force those lawmakers that get so bogged down and influenced by all the political rhetoric that really isn't rooted in engineering (and engineers are really the ones best suited to figure this out) to come up with a solution that is worse than the problem.