Robert Andrews wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Filesharing is an example of an application type that is different than
most other usage. What I mean is that most applications that use the
Net are direct usage. Somebody requests something and it gets
delivered, be it a web page or a HD movie. BitTorrent is a server
application. And it should be billed as such. Most of the bad usage
of BitTorrent is from it delivering traffic to other users. Most people
are going to distort the normal usage by becoming application servers.
So we say no bittorrent or other PtP because they aren't paying to be a
Server. we charge people 5x what they normally pay to be a server.
It's the only fair way to be to those that aren't abusing the bandwidth
available. The other argument against PtP is that the vast majority of
content delivered over it is illegal and that represents a huge
liability to our business. A recent study at a major university looked
at the content on most bittorrent servers and 90% was copyrighted and
should not be distributed that way. We explain that to most customers
and the agree that being charged a price to deal with that liability
would not be worth it.
ISPs fall under common carrior protection when it comes to passing
copyrighted material across their network. This has been held up in
court several times.
If 90% of the traffic is illegal that means that 10% is legit and you
have just blocked those paying customers who have done nothing wrong and
are trying to use a service that they paid you good moeny for. Again,
if the issue is your network can't handle the PPS find a way to limit
PPS, if you can't handle the bandwidth implement bandwidth caps.
Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless
On 02/14/2010 02:02 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
Here is the struggle I face with this type of argument. If 20% of your
customers are using 90% of your bandwidth, aren't you really overcharging
the other 80% if you are going to gripe about the 20%?
I think you mean undercharging the 80%? Maybe, but my smallest advertised
price is 45/mo. This has done a great job of keeping those bottom dollar
customers away (those great Friday night calls saying my Internet is slow I
can't get my Netflix shows in high def in less then a second so I want a
refund kind of thing).
I keep seeing PPS being a limiting factor - what equipment is everyone using
hitting this barrier?
As far as word of mouth, I agree that you don't simply want to axe them and
be done with it. This is why I suggest talking and communicating. My
dial-up provider called me complaining I was on nearly 24/7 on my unlimited
service so they simply asked me to not be connected when I wasn't using it.
I simply checked dial on demand and made both of us happy.
First it gives you a leg to stand on when the customer complains to you or
the authorities, if we ever get saddled with net neutrality rules with
teeth.
I believe we're all private companies. Right to refuse service to anyone
for any reason. At this point there is no law against blocking certain
traffic, is there?
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue
that counts.”
--- Winston Churchill
On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Sam Tetherow <[email protected]> wrote:
Here is the struggle I face with this type of argument. If 20% of your
customers are using 90% of your bandwidth, aren't you really overcharging
the other 80% if you are going to gripe about the 20%?
Another thing to consider, at least for me, is that almost all of my
successful advertising is word of mouth. Now, how much of that good word of
mouth advertising comes from the 20% I would have just axed vs the 80% that
are apparently overpaying for their bandwidth?
As far as the 'ban hammer' I don't think banning torrent traffic is the way
to go (or any application for that matter). If torrent traffic is causing
problems on your network it is not because it is a torrent, it is because it
presents certain type of traffic characteristics, such as high packet rate,
excessive bandwidth usage, excessive upstream usage.
What needs to be addressed is the characteristic that is causing the
problem. First it gives you a leg to stand on when the customer complains
to you or the authorities, if we ever get saddled with net neutrality rules
with teeth. And secondly it fixes the actual problem as oppose to just
removing a symptom. All that has to happen is encrypting the torrent
traffic and you won't be able to track it and the problem is back; or
another application comes along which exhibits the same characteristics.
Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless
Josh Luthman wrote:
The way I see it is if 20% of your customers use 90% of your cost,
removing 20% of your revenue is worth dropping costs to 10%.
On 2/14/10, Butch Evans <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 2010-02-13 at 23:30 -0500, Josh Luthman wrote:
It doesn't make sense to simply disallow it - offer a bandwidth plan
that makes you both happy. If you can't resolve it then he has
another ISP. Let them deal with the problem.
If he pays for 1 meg and does it all the time we both know that's the
kind of customer that kills your profit and therefor your business.
You and I are WISPs to make money and serve the area - this can't be
done when someone is paying 25/mo and ruining it for everyone.
There are ways to accomplish the "best of both worlds" here. My new QOS
approach allows you to permit the traffic, even if you limit it's impact
by setting a speed limit, and still allow good speeds for other users.
One thing that you cannot fix with QOS is the reality that torrents are
very high packet rates (usually) and (also usually) not very high
bandwidth per connection. My approach, still, is to allow it, but set
limits on it's impact on the network. Give it a small amount of
bandwidth that is shared by other users with the same type of network
utilization and let them have at it. All in all, though, I agree with
Josh. The 5-10% of abusers (most cases, it's not even that many) are
not worth what they pay. However, it will get to a point where that
number goes to 20-30% when certain services (like the streaming video)
become more popular. When that happens, it's not a good business
decision to simply drop the traffic and lose 20% of your business.
Thinking of these things makes me happy I'm no longer an ISP. I really
do think that you'll find that the QOS system I've developed will be
very helpful, though.
--
********************************************************************
* Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation*
* http://www.butchevans.com/ * Network Engineering *
* http://store.wispgear.net/ * Wired or Wireless Networks *
* http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! *
********************************************************************
_______________________________________________
Mikrotik mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.butchevans.com/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik
Visit http://blog.butchevans.com/ for tutorials related to Mikrotik
RouterOS
_______________________________________________
Mikrotik mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.butchevans.com/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik
Visit http://blog.butchevans.com/ for tutorials related to Mikrotik
RouterOS
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://www.butchevans.com/pipermail/mikrotik/attachments/20100214/f7a5e6aa/attachment.html>
_______________________________________________
Mikrotik mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.butchevans.com/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik
Visit http://blog.butchevans.com/ for tutorials related to Mikrotik RouterOS
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJLeH//AAoJEO0qoUuK0uZgtokH/0/+Jqpn8CQdtxRz0AuIKUF5
/8hPsbPaVN5oOSXHVV3ffPxreGGdI00z8WJazodo7870e+9IsUFZcT/sruaa4KeU
nLnAi2MLjjSctklSdz5707sWnGgIUcfn5OTd9KvPDKt+W8q+QAp9Ed8r+U8P9k+y
kFysvUyASE0PEUleP/Qqib6S4czBXdD8rD/15aUKS5W6JEbwk4Lfmnt9Dg9Bnip0
QyDMb+D1SXebx8CRz3ueuLGMouompR+hdM6ADc086R32d7onF19r3KN+7tbqhrld
IgOvFtt5H9wXa5Vb1HnEPKyR2VQr4TsYua3DnkdrUKry8nm7zpa6yDhjlhr3274=
=a3SA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Mikrotik mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.butchevans.com/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik
Visit http://blog.butchevans.com/ for tutorials related to Mikrotik RouterOS
_______________________________________________
Mikrotik mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.butchevans.com/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik
Visit http://blog.butchevans.com/ for tutorials related to Mikrotik RouterOS
