Re: The status of consumer rate-limiting?

[Niels Bakker]

* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Owings, Curtis L [GMG]) [Tue 22 Jul 2003, 20:10 CEST]:
> I'm interested in an informal poll of consumer ISP's regarding
> application rate-limiting.  For all you folks out there managing
> "broadband" networks to residential end-users:

We're asking everybody to turn off HTML when they post to mailing lists.


-- Niels.

Re: The status of consumer rate-limiting?

[Dan Hollis]

On Tue, 22 Jul 2003, Niels Bakker wrote:
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Owings, Curtis L [GMG]) [Tue 22 Jul 2003, 20:10 CEST]:
> > I'm interested in an informal poll of consumer ISP's regarding
> > application rate-limiting.  For all you folks out there managing
> > "broadband" networks to residential end-users:
> We're asking everybody to turn off HTML when they post to mailing lists.

Actually, i wish the nanog ml would just block mime and attachments outright.

-Dan
-- 
[-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-]

Re: The status of consumer rate-limiting?

[Dr. Jeffrey Race]

On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 20:13:35 +0200, Niels Bakker wrote:

>We're asking everybody to turn off HTML when they post to mailing lists.

Here's some boilerplate I wrote for this purpose:

 

Re: The status of consumer rate limiting?

[Fletcher E Kittredge]

> Are you controlling peer-to-peer traffic in some way (i.e.
> rate-limiting, blocking, etc)?
> 

no

> Do you have plans to control peer-to-peer traffic?

no

> Are you imposing other total traffic download/upload limits?

no

Additional comment:  we market based on "no limits" and so far have
met our expectations of doing very well against competitors that
limit.  I don't think limiting is viable in the long run...

regards,
fletcher

Re: The status of consumer rate limiting?

[Fletcher E Kittredge]

> Are you controlling peer-to-peer traffic in some way (i.e.
> rate-limiting, blocking, etc)?

no

> 
> Do you have plans to control peer-to-peer traffic?

Re: The status of consumer rate limiting?

[Stephen J. Wilcox]

Since some p2p programs now use well known port numbers allocated to other 
things eg port 80, is it even possible to block/rate limit them? And have folks 
attempts at blocking caused this move to use such port numbers which imho is not 
a good thing..

Steve

On Tue, 22 Jul 2003, Fletcher E Kittredge wrote:

> 
> 
> > Are you controlling peer-to-peer traffic in some way (i.e.
> > rate-limiting, blocking, etc)?
> > 
> 
> no
> 
> > Do you have plans to control peer-to-peer traffic?
> 
> no
> 
> > Are you imposing other total traffic download/upload limits?
> 
> no
> 
> Additional comment:  we market based on "no limits" and so far have
> met our expectations of doing very well against competitors that
> limit.  I don't think limiting is viable in the long run...
> 
> regards,
> fletcher
> 

Re: The status of consumer rate limiting?

[Mans Nilsson]

Subject: Re: The status of consumer rate limiting? Date: Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 
01:40:20AM +0100 Quoting Stephen J. Wilcox ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> 
> Since some p2p programs now use well known port numbers allocated to other 
> things eg port 80, is it even possible to block/rate limit them? And have folks 
> attempts at blocking caused this move to use such port numbers which imho is not 
> a good thing..

I'm still waiting for a P2P system running inside IPsec. With XP
and W2k making inroads on consumer computers there now is a significant
user base with access to luser-friendly systems carrying these
capabilities.

-- 
Måns Nilsson Systems Specialist
+46 70 681 7204 KTHNOC
MN1334-RIPE

He probably just wants to take over my CELLS and then EXPLODE inside me
like a BARREL of runny CHOPPED LIVER!  Or maybe he'd like to
PSYCHOLIGICALLY TERRORISE ME until I have no objection to a RIGHT-WING
MILITARY TAKEOVER of my apartment!!  I guess I should call AL PACINO!


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: The status of consumer rate limiting?

[Petri Helenius]

>
> Since some p2p programs now use well known port numbers allocated to other
> things eg port 80, is it even possible to block/rate limit them? And have folks
> attempts at blocking caused this move to use such port numbers which imho is not
> a good thing..
>
As long as there are some bits in the stream that give away the ultimate application
of that stream it´s possible. Using SSL / IPSEC / some proprietary protocol will
degrade the detection to look for "elephant flows" but still allows for some bandwidth
regulation when neccessary.

To look beyond the packet you either need more sophisticated hardware or reasonable
speeds, like in the gigabit range, not 10G/40G.

Pete

Re: The status of consumer rate limiting?

[Eric Gauthier]

> I'm still waiting for a P2P system running inside IPsec. With XP
> and W2k making inroads on consumer computers there now is a significant
> user base with access to luser-friendly systems carrying these
> capabilities.

I'm not positive, but I thought Filetopia used SSL transfers on port 443 for
its filesharing...

Eric :)