[ NNSquad ] Re: Messages regarding Internet video and other high traffic applications

[Brett Glass <nnsquad@brettglass.com>]

At 10:44 PM 2/23/2008, Lauren Weinstein wrote:
 
>Brett Glass replied with: "And so you're complaining?  Be glad.
>Many ISPs would cut off or throttle a stream that heavy."  
>(Brett, could you provide us with contacts at any ISPs -- other than 
>your own of course -- that we can contact to better understand the basis
>of your apparently categorical assertion?  Thanks.)

How about:

Time Warner Cable
AT&T
Verizon
WISPA

All stated, in their comments to the FCC, that throttling of bandwidth
hogs is necessary. I've personally seen Time Warner throttle long-lived 
HTTPS downloads to 128K. I've also seen Bresnan Communications throttle
big downloads to a similar speed, though the last time I checked this 
was a couple of years ago and I don't know what their throttling is
like now.

The point is that ISPs MUST throttle and shape traffic. With the cost 
of backbone bandwidth, they simply have no choice; they're not in 
business to lose money. So, I can tell you with confidence that EVERY
ONE does. Sorry if you don't like it; you can't expect something for
nothing.

Will they tell you exactly when and how they throttle? Probably not,
because as soon as they do, hackers will use the information to try
to get around it.

--Brett Glass

  [ Brett, you made a seemingly categorical statement that many ISPs would
    "cut off or throttle" a 2 Mbps media stream.  Your usual argument is that
    virtually all uses of P2P are illegal and so P2P users deserve what they
    get.  Forget P2P for a moment.  Let's concentrate on PC users
    streaming/downloading legal content from legal sites, and consumer devices
    similarly downloading/streaming free content or content for which their
    owners are paying.  If ISPs are going to throttle that content to an
    extent that makes it unusable or impractical, then consumers deserve to
    know this before they spend their money for these legal devices and
    materials -- and that means more specific notification and "disclosed
    rules" than vague TOS statements.

    If ISPs are going to "cut off" such traffic -- your words -- then the
    situation is even more significant, and again I'd appreciate your pointing
    us at the relevant executives responsible for the "cutoffs" that you
    purport are taking place.

    And one more issue -- given your oft-stated pronouncements that ISPs
    should be able to do pretty much whatever they want with their networks
    free of any outside "interference," (not your exact words, but I think
    that captures the gist) exactly how are consumers to be protected from
    ISPs who might choose to "shape" their networks, bandwidth allocations,
    and bandwidth cap decisions in manners that favor their own TV, movie, and
    other access services to the detriment of outside competing providers of
    those services who depend on those ISPs for consumer access?  Is this just
    a "tough luck, suckers!" situation in your view, unworthy of concern?

       -- Lauren Weinstein
          NNSquad Moderator ]