I put a connection limit on all traffic from ports 1024-65535, because the torrent has to use a connection somewhere and usually the bit progs are set to use somewhere above port 1024. That will not help on UDP or the ones using port 80. I have another connection limit set higher on all tcp connections to try to help combat the port 80 users.
---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: George Rogato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: WISPA General List <wireless@wispa.org> Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 19:15:14 -0800 >Thats my point. I use star and it has all the layer 7 stuff built into >the cpe. I can control to my hearts content. Generaly I put a switch in >or bridge the linksys wifi router and take control there. If I had to >and I did one situation, I can give daddy one set of rules and little >abusing johnny another. > >for the most part, I don't have too much to worry about, it's not being >able to tightly control the encrypted stuff that is the issue. > > > >CHUCK PROFITO wrote: >> You are nuts or spoiled on 5 gig or have fiber stuffed up every tower. 1 >> P2P on a 2.4 rural ap opening 100+ connections will packet flood an ap in >> about 1 minute. 2.4 will only realistically deliver 5 megs per radio. 1 P2P >> uploading to 60 plus users will be slowed enough to bring the bits per >> packet way down, then the packet flood ensues. Now put six sectors on a >> tower, with 300+ subs, 10 megs of back haul, then add 6 P2P and on top of >> that add three or four bit torrent users with 50 or 60 connections each down >> loading the best movie ever from Netflix, and now your backhaul starts the >> flood too.. And you are 30 miles from the fiber head in. Yeah, right... >> Don't tell me not to shape the traffic. >> >> Chuck Profito >> 209-988-7388 >> CV-ACCESS, INC >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Providing High Speed Broadband >> to Rural Central California >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> Behalf Of George Rogato >> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 6:42 PM >> To: WISPA General List >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC >> >> >> Come on, you guys that sell "slow" broadband generaly don't have too >> much to worry about. It's not like if you got an ap that does 10 megs >> and you sell 50 512k subs that the one or three out of 20 running p2p is >> going to be very noticable. >> Try giving those 50 equal access to the full 10 megs and see what >> happens then, if you don't throttle the p2p. >> >> >> >> >> >> Travis Johnson wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >> If your network can't handle a small amount of p2p >>> traffic, you have bigger issues. :) >>> >>> Travis >>> Microserv >>> >> >> >> >>> George Rogato wrote: >>>> How do you cap the encrypted stuff? >>>> >>>> >>>> Travis Johnson wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> First let me say that we cap p2p traffic during the business day, >>>>> but >>>>> otherwise we let it run wide open. However, we sell our connections >>>>> based on speed. Whatever they pay for is what they get... none of >>>>> this burstable stuff, etc. If they want 512k, they pay for 512k. If >>>>> they want 1meg, they pay for 1meg. >>>>> >>>>> The problem with bandwidth caps of xx gigs per month is that NOBODY >>>>> else is doing it... not DSL, not Cable, not any of my wireless >>>>> competitors, etc. Once you start putting that limitation on their >>>>> connection, they will start switching to something that does not have >>>>> caps. If you have bandwidth limits in place already, there is no need >>>>> for the monthly limits. (This does not mean we allow 24x7 bandwidth >>>>> usage, but we allow "reasonable" usage). >>>>> >>>>> Travis >>>>> Microserv >>>>> >>>>> George Rogato wrote: >>>>>> I think the way to go is to be able to identify the various types >>>>>> of >>>>>> traffic and rate limit them. >>>>>> And once we can do this, then it's time to pull out the menu of >>>>>> various offerings we can provide. >>>>>> Want a 3 meg x 3 meg burstable connection with a sustained traffic >>>>>> rate of 1meg x 256k and bandwidth cap of x gigs, it's price "a", >>>>>> want a higher something in your package, it's price "b". Want >>>>>> something different, then it's price "c". >>>>>> >>>>>> The sub can choose. Once they choose they know what they bought. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Mark Nash wrote: >>>>>>> This is a good debate. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What you mention here, George, is something that's been on my mind >>>>>>> for the >>>>>>> last year or so. As Lingo/Slingbox/Netflix/Vonage/etc/etc/etc make >>>>>>> $$$ off >>>>>>> of our connections, where's our cut? The customer is paying for a >>>>>>> connection, yes, but at what point do we start charging more as >>>>>>> this content >>>>>>> proliferates through our networks? Bandwidth is getting cheaper >>>>>>> per meg, >>>>>>> you can get a bigger pipe for less per meg, you can do things to >>>>>>> lower the >>>>>>> cost of bandwidth. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> However, that should give US a better cash flow model, so we're >>>>>>> not so squeezed out that we feel like not providing service >>>>>>> anymore to folks who desperately want it. With more and more apps >>>>>>> providing high-throughput >>>>>>> content, it could easily offset the savings that can be realized by >>>>>>> going >>>>>>> with a bigger/cheaper pipe. IF IT IS UNCHECKED. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My whole part in this discussion has been focused on not letting >>>>>>> our customers cost us more than they are paying us, and I still >>>>>>> say that deploying a system that allows us to be compensated for >>>>>>> heavy usage is a valuable consideration in any business plan for >>>>>>> an ISP. Bandwidth shaping, >>>>>>> bandwidth caps, bill for overages, dedicated bandwidth option. If >>>>>>> you have >>>>>>> this in place, you really need not worry about anything else with >>>>>>> respect to >>>>>>> high bandwidth usage. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> IMHO. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks everyone for listening to my half-rant. I'm going to get >>>>>>> something >>>>>>> done now. ;) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Mark Nash >>>>>>> UnwiredOnline.Net >>>>>>> 350 Holly Street >>>>>>> Junction City, OR 97448 >>>>>>> http://www.uwol.net >>>>>>> 541-998-5555 >>>>>>> 541-998-5599 fax >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Rogato" >>>>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>>> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 8:51 AM >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Another thought is >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Why wouldn't Vuze have to pay Comcast for using the Comcast >>>>>>>> network to >>>>>>>> support it's business plan. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If they are relying on Comcasts network to store and send files >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> it's >>>>>>>> customer base, why should they be treated for a free ride instead of >>>>>>>> using a hosting provider like Akamia. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Guess that is just as a significant point as any other, the fair >>>>>>>> compensation for services? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> --------- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> ------ >>>>>>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>>>>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> --------- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> ------ >>>>>>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>>>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>> -------------- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>>>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>> -------------- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>>>> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> ------------ >>>>> >>>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> ------------ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>>>> >>>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>>> >>>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ---------- >>> >>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ---------- >>> >>> >>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>> >>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > >-- >George Rogato > >Welcome to WISPA > >www.wispa.org > >http://signup.wispa.org/ > > >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >WISPA Wants You! Join today! >http://signup.wispa.org/ >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > >Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >--- >[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] > > Dial-Up Internet service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as $9.99/mth. Check out www.info-ed.com for information. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
