Thread: Sandvine
View Single Post
  #23  
Old 2007-09-05, 05:04 PM
direwolf-pgh's Avatar
direwolf-pgh direwolf-pgh is offline
On the Beach
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: down in the basement
Re: Sandvine

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubular
I agree that the cat & mouse game is not a good solution. It would be much better to drop Concast. But they aren't blocking specific clients, just the actions of all clients:
http://torrentfreak.com/comcast-thro...ng-impossible/ "The throttling works like this: A few seconds after you connect to someone in the swarm the Sandvine application sends a peer reset message (RST flag) and the upload immediately stops."
yeah yeah - this was covered on the first page of this thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubular
Now couldn't a client disable the RST flag that Sandvine sends out before it has a chance to work? I really don't know jack about this, but might that work? Sandvine might find other ways to throttle you, but until then....I mean if they really wanted to cut down on traffic and stop less than legal downloads, they could simply block all clients except a client that reported your activity to a watchdog group (I think). With purchased BT downloads, the seller could always pay a bandwidth fee to Concast and add that to the price of the download. Regarding free trade, I don't think interest would be as high for 30 yr. old Dead shows or a German TV broadcast of SRV as they would for the new Britney album, so traffic drops. I think what Concast is selling is the idea that you can download music. They don't want to lose customers who want to get the Britney album for free because they're selling the possibility that you can get it free. But in reality they are taking steps to prevent it, without being too obvious about it.
huh ?
I dont think comcast made this move to get into the bittorrent business. Have you seen anything to make you think they wish to sell its customers a torrent ?
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes