Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC
The Comcast deal has very little to do with traffic prioritization except for the regulatory liability of ineptness. The Comcast deal, using Sandvine gear, actually _actively_ disrupts the service by inserting spoofed packets into the TCP stream, which is a far cry from the best effort philosophy that that usually applies to residential connections is best effort. Traffic prioritization is MUCH different than blocking, rate limiting, or, in the comcast case, actively disrupting service. The issue we have before us, is are we the operators of our network, or is the government/consumer/application? So, where do you stand on using FCC-certified gear? :) (_please_, don't answer--I'm not wanting to get that started up again) To some extent, the government _does_ have a right to have some say in how utilities operate. You are not a retail shop, you are not an eatery, you are not running a car wash. You are, in at least some sense, a telecommunications utility--and, just like there are regulations that ensure certain guidelines in being able to place telephone calls, watch television, and so forth, there are, will, and should be certain guidelines regulating you as a telecommunications utility. I philosophically don't buy the it's my network, and I can do whatever the hell I want with it idea. What level and what type of regulations is something to be discussed, but that they do, will, and should exist on some level is a given. 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/
Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC
I completely disagree that the government should have anything to do with our industry and that it is a given except in matters of anti-trust, managing a scarce public resource (radio spectrum) or safety. Anything else hands off. And that also applies to any other industry. I could understand regulating us if VOIP replaces the normal PSTN network for safety reasons ak. E911. This is never going to happen though due to cell phones. I also can understand the need for CALEA and agree with it, again for the safety of the public. Other then that I can't see any other reason why we should have any regulations on our industry or any other industry. Anthony Will Broadband Corp. http://www.broadband-mn.com Clint Ricker wrote: The Comcast deal has very little to do with traffic prioritization except for the regulatory liability of ineptness. The Comcast deal, using Sandvine gear, actually _actively_ disrupts the service by inserting spoofed packets into the TCP stream, which is a far cry from the best effort philosophy that that usually applies to residential connections is best effort. Traffic prioritization is MUCH different than blocking, rate limiting, or, in the comcast case, actively disrupting service. The issue we have before us, is are we the operators of our network, or is the government/consumer/application? So, where do you stand on using FCC-certified gear? :) (_please_, don't answer--I'm not wanting to get that started up again) To some extent, the government _does_ have a right to have some say in how utilities operate. You are not a retail shop, you are not an eatery, you are not running a car wash. You are, in at least some sense, a telecommunications utility--and, just like there are regulations that ensure certain guidelines in being able to place telephone calls, watch television, and so forth, there are, will, and should be certain guidelines regulating you as a telecommunications utility. I philosophically don't buy the it's my network, and I can do whatever the hell I want with it idea. What level and what type of regulations is something to be discussed, but that they do, will, and should exist on some level is a given. 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/
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/
Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC
Clint Ricker wrote: Traffic prioritization is MUCH different than blocking, rate limiting, or, in the comcast case, actively disrupting service. What if I want to sell various plans each with specific terms? To simplify things, I could have a cheap deal, that gave a high download rate and a low upload rate, or a mid priced plan that had a high download rate and a high upload rate, and a high priced plan that had a high sustained usage upload and download rate. Wouldn't that be fair to both me and the consumer? Can I not rate limit and give the customer a choice of different plans at different prices? 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/
Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC
On Nov 20, 2007 11:17 AM, George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Clint Ricker wrote: Traffic prioritization is MUCH different than blocking, rate limiting, or, in the comcast case, actively disrupting service. What if I want to sell various plans each with specific terms? To simplify things, I could have a cheap deal, that gave a high download rate and a low upload rate, or a mid priced plan that had a high download rate and a high upload rate, and a high priced plan that had a high sustained usage upload and download rate. Wouldn't that be fair to both me and the consumer? Can I not rate limit and give the customer a choice of different plans at different prices? Sure. No problem. Just not on a per protocol basis except for some fairly generic and sensible prioritizations. Do you _really_ want an Internet that resembles http://isen.com/blog/uploaded_images/boingboingscreenshot-723474.jpg? If this seems far-fetched to you, go shop for cell phones and evdo service and read the TOS :) Honestly, if the world was full of small WISPs, this would be a different matter. But, consider the following: 1. About 90% (rough guess, I'm not sure of what the statistic is) of the United States Internet users are on connections through providers that offer services (and, indeed, derive most of their profit) that directly compete with services that run through their Internet access. (the RBOCs and major MSOs) 2. Those same service providers constitute, more or less, an oligarchy since they generally act in unison on both regulatory petitions (odd how all major ILECs just happen to file similar FCC petitions on the same day--great minds must think alike) and so forth and pretty much control the market. 3. Now, those same service providers are selectively blocking and filtering traffic, some of which carries content which just happens to undermine the value of their major cash cows. Most of you seem to be saying: so what?. I still maintain that this is _not_ a positive path for the industry and for your interests. Sure, you can squeeze a couple of dollars of margin (if that) off of some resi accounts. But, you undercut the very infrastructure that makes you profitable. Some of you probably are almost hoping to use this to entice customers--ie let Comcast screw their customers over; it'll drive customers my way Consider this, however. In the end, people use your connections to connect to applications and services on the Internet. If your competitors offer voice services but kill off an Internet voice industry, how many people will buy your service to connect to Vonage, etc.. Plenty...until Vonage can't make it with access to only 10% of the market. Video services, collaborative office apps, etc... The application providers that, in the end, drive your business, cannot survive in areas where they only have reasonable access to a fraction of the market. I would prefer that free market _could_ fix this problem. But, when you are dealing with entities that are looking to leverage their horizontal monopoly to build vertical monopolies, the rules of capitalism start breaking down pretty quickly. -Clint Ricker Kentnis Technologies 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/
Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC
George, Comcast's customers are the ones paying for access to the Comcast network. If a Comcast customer wants to use Vuze, he should be able to because he is ALREADY PAYING FOR THE RIGHT TO USE THE NETWORK. This idea of content providers being parasites on networks is a total load of horsecrap promoted by the phone and cable companies to keep their networks as closed as possible. Matt Larsen vistabeam.com George Rogato wrote: 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/
Re: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures
Call Butch, We set ALL ptp traffic to share a single 128k connection. :-) laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Ron Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:58 PM Subject: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures To All, The issue of P2P rears its relatively unattractivehead in my neck of the woods from time to time. This is one of those times. - So, what is everyone doing to'counter' the influx of traffic from P2P? - What are the most effective P2P countermeasures that you have employed, lately? - For those fo you that respond, I will put it all in a file and make it available to all, via Scriv. Heck who should approve the dumpingofthat info onto WISPA - Rick Harnish - I'll checkwith him. Ron Wallace Hahnron, Inc. 220 S. Jackson Dt. Addison, MI 49220 Phone: (517)547-8410 Mobile: (517)605-4542 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/
Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC
I have always thought that if you buy DEDICATED bandwidth you can do what you want with it. If you buy a best effort service then you have to be willing to share marlon Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 10:48 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC I've been a firm believer in that the last mile can shoot themselves in the foot if they like, but the next company up in the chain must be neutral. Level 3, ATT, Cogent, Verizon, NTT, etc. should not be doing anything on their end for their wholesale markets again, if they have retail end users, do whatever they want. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Matt Larsen - Lists [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 12:03 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC This is not a black or white position - take the time to read the Vuze petition and focus specifically on the last two pages where they outline the goals of what they want to achieve. Then take some time and look at what Comcast did to Bit Torrent - they specifically broke the application. What Vuze is asking for is pretty reasonable - the ability to run their applications without undue interference. If you back Comcast, you are backing the ability for YOUR backbone provider to break the applications you run on their network. The Vuze petition is the position that should be backed, IMHO. Matt Larsen vistabeam.com George Rogato wrote: I'm not buying it. Yes, we as service providers have a right to determine th service level agreements we want to set for the price we decide. A consumer has always believed that they have an unlimited do anything they want with our connection mentality. We on the other hand have always had terms of service that nullify the anything you want unlimited mentality. If we are in disagreement with Comcast's position, then what are we really saying? We would be saying, anything goes, we have no control, we can't rate limit. The free market system, does not tie the hands of the isp, but rather allows us each to set our own service levels and terms of service, and compete based on our own service offerings. To restrict an isp from making a decision, is in no way the free market system, but rather the regulated system. I'm with Comcast on this. I do not want to be regulated. Let me live or die on the way I decide to run my network. Thanks Eje for bringing this to our attention. My recommendation is to back Comcast. George Clint Ricker wrote: Sam and Matt, very well said. To the rest: If you are petitioning the FCC in union with the cable companies and telcos, you are screwing your future and help your competition. You can't win by the rules that they make. The network neutrality battle could potentially change the service provider economics enough in very positive directions for you. This is a politically-charged enough topic that something interesting may actually happen on this :) First of all, get more customers! With enough customers, the oversubscription on bandwidth becomes much better--you can fit thousands and thousands of resi customers in a 100Mb/s pipe without dropping, but about 10-20 in a 5Mb/s pipe. With enough customers, the bandwidth cost per customer comes down to almost nothing. If you need to limit a couple of outlying customers (the ones using 3Mb/s all the time), sure, go ahead. But don't hate bit torrent or any other protocol :) Bit Torrent bandwidth costs _exactly_ the same price as http bandwidth. I really don't agree with a business philosophy that fundamentally sees it as a bad thing if people are actually using your service :). Embrace it and figure out how to make it profitable (hint--spend more time getting new customers and less time trying to shave costs). The bandwidth math is MUCH better with 1,000 customers than a hundred and MUCH better with 10,000 than a 1,000. To everyone thinking that there needs to be network neutrality requirements for big guys, but little guys should be allowed to block: do you really want to send the message to your (potential) customers: hey--my competition will let you run the service you want, I won't. This is an opportunity to actually get ahead of the game and have a leg up on your competition. Here are the facts as I see them (applies to the residential market only): 1. The cost of bandwidth for telcos and MSOs is really extremely low on a per customer basis. The bulk of their cost--and why this is a big
Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC
I'll bet I have MORE competition per capita than you do I compete against DSL, Cable, FTTH, and other WISPs in almost all of my coverage zones. Sometimes all three are there! The problem isn't all about the incoming bandwidth cost. There is also a capacity/spectrum cost on the tower end laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Clint Ricker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 10:43 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC Marlon, you are pretty rural :) You probably would have a hard time growing much without heading 500 miles to find a market with more people than cows :). From what I'd guess from your economics, strict bandwidth caps may be a good choice for you--but, for people who either are in or have access to larger markets, more subscribers is a better route for _so_ many reasons and has the nice benefit of making bandwidth much cheaper on a per-subscriber basis--increased oversubscription ratios combined with lower bandwidth costs. Thanks, -Clint Ricker Kentnis Technologies On Nov 19, 2007 12:20 PM, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's easy to say when you are in an area with thousands of potential customers ;-) Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 8:48 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC I'm glad someone else has the same philosophy I do. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Clint Ricker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 9:48 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC Sam and Matt, very well said. To the rest: If you are petitioning the FCC in union with the cable companies and telcos, you are screwing your future and help your competition. You can't win by the rules that they make. The network neutrality battle could potentially change the service provider economics enough in very positive directions for you. This is a politically-charged enough topic that something interesting may actually happen on this :) First of all, get more customers! With enough customers, the oversubscription on bandwidth becomes much better--you can fit thousands and thousands of resi customers in a 100Mb/s pipe without dropping, but about 10-20 in a 5Mb/s pipe. With enough customers, the bandwidth cost per customer comes down to almost nothing. If you need to limit a couple of outlying customers (the ones using 3Mb/s all the time), sure, go ahead. But don't hate bit torrent or any other protocol :) Bit Torrent bandwidth costs _exactly_ the same price as http bandwidth. I really don't agree with a business philosophy that fundamentally sees it as a bad thing if people are actually using your service :). Embrace it and figure out how to make it profitable (hint--spend more time getting new customers and less time trying to shave costs). The bandwidth math is MUCH better with 1,000 customers than a hundred and MUCH better with 10,000 than a 1,000. To everyone thinking that there needs to be network neutrality requirements for big guys, but little guys should be allowed to block: do you really want to send the message to your (potential) customers: hey--my competition will let you run the service you want, I won't. This is an opportunity to actually get ahead of the game and have a leg up on your competition. Here are the facts as I see them (applies to the residential market only): 1. The cost of bandwidth for telcos and MSOs is really extremely low on a per customer basis. The bulk of their cost--and why this is a big issue for them--is the cost of getting that bandwidth to the customer. For these guys, the major cost is in the transport networks: fiber buildout is extremely expensive, transport gear is incredibly expensive, etc. WISPs have ridiculously cheap transport networks and, with enough scale, don't really pay much more for bandwidth. If you get scale, your bandwidth costs also drop. In other words, once you hit a certain scale, your cost of delivering service becomes much less than your competition. 2. You can't compete on price with a telco/mso doing triple play. The economics aren't there. You don't offer video.
Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC
You're right, Mike. Never. I understand that, and I guess my previous post kind of eluded to me thinking that way. The second part of your analogy is perfect for my point... The state charges extra registration. They charge more for the frequency and the way they use the road (heavier vehicles abuse the road more). Mark Nash UnwiredOnline.Net 350 Holly Street Junction City, OR 97448 http://www.uwol.net 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 9:43 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC At what point? Never. Your taxes (or tolls) go to pay for the right to use the road. The state charges extra registration for commercial vehicles, but they don't have the right to charge anyone more based on what they use the road for. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Mark Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 11:34 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC 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- 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:
Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC
Is WISPA or Part-15 posting follow up comments on this? Is anyone? Don't most broadband Internet user agreements have a clause that says something like no servers? Is bittorrent a server? Matt I looked in the mailing list but there seem at least not to been any discussion about this. If there been my apologies. As some of you might know there is a petition turned over to the FCC that relates to net neutrality. Vuze, Inc is a video content provider whom utilizes bittorrent protocol to deliver their content to the end user. Due to the recent articles and discoveries where Comcast seems to either be blocking peer to peer traffic or as they claim bandwidth manage it (but according to end users and some tests) to a point where it's impossible to get any data through Vuze, Inc have filed a petition asking FCC to rule about the bandwidth management handling. If they get their way and FCC rules in their favor as I see it this could be a major problem for anyone in the ISP market especially the small players. If you throttle or block peer to peer traffic in any way then this could potentially have a huge impact on you and your network. The reason most ISP's are throttle this traffic is to prevent abuse of your network and control the impact these fileshare applications can have on the network which can/will cause problems for other customers that try to use the internet interactively while the fileshare (ab)user more then likely is not even at their computer. For many ISPs internet bandwidth can cost them anywhere from $100 to $1000 per megabit and many times access is sold for $30-$60 for 512k-1.5Mbit. So what could the result be of this petition if you ask me. Considerable increase of service fees to the customers which might mean that they leave for a larger ISP (cable co, phone co) because their cost for access is generally far less and they can be more competitive. In markets where you compete with these carriers I feel that one of the way you can compete is by selling similar service level at similar prices but manage the bandwidth better to avoid abuse of your network and this way level the market more. So read the petition. I urge all WISP's to comment on this petition. Explain why you feel not being allowed to manage this traffic would be a bad thing and what the economical impact could be. I would love to see the big guys be prohibited from bandwidth manage peer to peer traffic but still allow the smaller players to continue to manage this traffic. Personally I think it's wrong to blatantly block it unless your in an extreme rural area and bandwidth is an extreme problem. Ie some providers in for example Alaska are limited to satellite feeds that are not very fast and costs an incredible amount or where the highest feed they can get is a T1 or two at outrageous price and the infrastructure behind the T1 can not handle large amount of traffic. Below is a link to the Petition filed by Vuze, Inc to FCC. http://www.vistaprint.com/vp/gateway.aspx?S=5176697856 http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdfid_docume nt=6519811711 id_document=6519811711 / Eje WISP-Router, Inc. 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/
Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC
Agreed. Sharing is good. But, best effort implies that, well, an effort is being made to deliver the traffic, not we will actively try to stop insert disliked protocol of the month :) On Nov 20, 2007 12:38 PM, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have always thought that if you buy DEDICATED bandwidth you can do what you want with it. If you buy a best effort service then you have to be willing to share marlon Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 10:48 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC I've been a firm believer in that the last mile can shoot themselves in the foot if they like, but the next company up in the chain must be neutral. Level 3, ATT, Cogent, Verizon, NTT, etc. should not be doing anything on their end for their wholesale markets again, if they have retail end users, do whatever they want. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Matt Larsen - Lists [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 12:03 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC This is not a black or white position - take the time to read the Vuze petition and focus specifically on the last two pages where they outline the goals of what they want to achieve. Then take some time and look at what Comcast did to Bit Torrent - they specifically broke the application. What Vuze is asking for is pretty reasonable - the ability to run their applications without undue interference. If you back Comcast, you are backing the ability for YOUR backbone provider to break the applications you run on their network. The Vuze petition is the position that should be backed, IMHO. Matt Larsen vistabeam.com George Rogato wrote: I'm not buying it. Yes, we as service providers have a right to determine th service level agreements we want to set for the price we decide. A consumer has always believed that they have an unlimited do anything they want with our connection mentality. We on the other hand have always had terms of service that nullify the anything you want unlimited mentality. If we are in disagreement with Comcast's position, then what are we really saying? We would be saying, anything goes, we have no control, we can't rate limit. The free market system, does not tie the hands of the isp, but rather allows us each to set our own service levels and terms of service, and compete based on our own service offerings. To restrict an isp from making a decision, is in no way the free market system, but rather the regulated system. I'm with Comcast on this. I do not want to be regulated. Let me live or die on the way I decide to run my network. Thanks Eje for bringing this to our attention. My recommendation is to back Comcast. George Clint Ricker wrote: Sam and Matt, very well said. To the rest: If you are petitioning the FCC in union with the cable companies and telcos, you are screwing your future and help your competition. You can't win by the rules that they make. The network neutrality battle could potentially change the service provider economics enough in very positive directions for you. This is a politically-charged enough topic that something interesting may actually happen on this :) First of all, get more customers! With enough customers, the oversubscription on bandwidth becomes much better--you can fit thousands and thousands of resi customers in a 100Mb/s pipe without dropping, but about 10-20 in a 5Mb/s pipe. With enough customers, the bandwidth cost per customer comes down to almost nothing. If you need to limit a couple of outlying customers (the ones using 3Mb/s all the time), sure, go ahead. But don't hate bit torrent or any other protocol :) Bit Torrent bandwidth costs _exactly_ the same price as http bandwidth. I really don't agree with a business philosophy that fundamentally sees it as a bad thing if people are actually using your service :). Embrace it and figure out how to make it profitable (hint--spend more time getting new customers and less time trying to shave costs). The bandwidth math is MUCH better with 1,000 customers than a hundred and MUCH better with 10,000 than a 1,000. To everyone thinking that there needs to be network neutrality requirements for big guys, but little guys should be allowed to block: do you really
Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC
By most every definition bittorrent is a server. Atleast the part of bittorrent that has the most negative impact on networks. The problem is mostly in customer education/perception. Most people don't know the negative impact that running bittorrent can have on a network, and the probably don't realize that by running a bittorrent client they are also running a server. There are things that can be done to drastically reduce the negative impact and still allow bittorrents to function, but most people don't realize they should change settings and most bittorrent sites and developers have a juvenile view towards bandwidth usage and the ISP in general. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless Matt wrote: Is WISPA or Part-15 posting follow up comments on this? Is anyone? Don't most broadband Internet user agreements have a clause that says something like no servers? Is bittorrent a server? Matt I looked in the mailing list but there seem at least not to been any discussion about this. If there been my apologies. As some of you might know there is a petition turned over to the FCC that relates to net neutrality. Vuze, Inc is a video content provider whom utilizes bittorrent protocol to deliver their content to the end user. Due to the recent articles and discoveries where Comcast seems to either be blocking peer to peer traffic or as they claim bandwidth manage it (but according to end users and some tests) to a point where it's impossible to get any data through Vuze, Inc have filed a petition asking FCC to rule about the bandwidth management handling. If they get their way and FCC rules in their favor as I see it this could be a major problem for anyone in the ISP market especially the small players. If you throttle or block peer to peer traffic in any way then this could potentially have a huge impact on you and your network. The reason most ISP's are throttle this traffic is to prevent abuse of your network and control the impact these fileshare applications can have on the network which can/will cause problems for other customers that try to use the internet interactively while the fileshare (ab)user more then likely is not even at their computer. For many ISPs internet bandwidth can cost them anywhere from $100 to $1000 per megabit and many times access is sold for $30-$60 for 512k-1.5Mbit. So what could the result be of this petition if you ask me. Considerable increase of service fees to the customers which might mean that they leave for a larger ISP (cable co, phone co) because their cost for access is generally far less and they can be more competitive. In markets where you compete with these carriers I feel that one of the way you can compete is by selling similar service level at similar prices but manage the bandwidth better to avoid abuse of your network and this way level the market more. So read the petition. I urge all WISP's to comment on this petition. Explain why you feel not being allowed to manage this traffic would be a bad thing and what the economical impact could be. I would love to see the big guys be prohibited from bandwidth manage peer to peer traffic but still allow the smaller players to continue to manage this traffic. Personally I think it's wrong to blatantly block it unless your in an extreme rural area and bandwidth is an extreme problem. Ie some providers in for example Alaska are limited to satellite feeds that are not very fast and costs an incredible amount or where the highest feed they can get is a T1 or two at outrageous price and the infrastructure behind the T1 can not handle large amount of traffic. Below is a link to the Petition filed by Vuze, Inc to FCC. http://www.vistaprint.com/vp/gateway.aspx?S=5176697856 http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdfid_docume nt=6519811711 id_document=6519811711 / Eje WISP-Router, Inc. 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/
Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC
Matt wrote: Don't most broadband Internet user agreements have a clause that says something like no servers? Is bittorrent a server? If you want to get really technical, there is no such thing as a server. :P There are programs that listen to certain TCP and UDP ports, but that's absolutely required for all Internet traffic anyway. (If you request a Web page, for instance, the request gets sent off, then your computer listens on a certain port, specifically the one it used to make the request, for a response. That's no different from their computer listening on, say, port 80 for people to request Web pages.) The customary definition would probably be program that listens of certain ports for requests all the time, but BitTorrent even cleverly circumvents that. Most BT clients can be configured not to listen, but they'll still send out parts of files to peers that they already know about, because perhaps they've already connected to that given peer to /download/ part of a file. I'm not aware of any BT clients that permit you to turn that off; in fact, most of them are configured to reward others' uploads. (If you're not uploading back to the swarm, other clients will shun you and your download speeds will be decreased.) While I imagine most of our contracts have no servers/daemons clauses, and you could technically use them to fire ANY customer (zomg your computer was listening on port 1234 right after you requested a Web page!) it's a bit of a heavy-handed way to solve the problem. (Anyone have a better way to solve the problem?) David Smith MVN.net 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/
Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC
Right, so that's why you charge a commercial account more than a residential. A car that drives 60 miles to work every day puts more wear and tear on the road than the commercial truck that drives across town once a week, but the state doesn't charge them any different. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Mark Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:04 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC You're right, Mike. Never. I understand that, and I guess my previous post kind of eluded to me thinking that way. The second part of your analogy is perfect for my point... The state charges extra registration. They charge more for the frequency and the way they use the road (heavier vehicles abuse the road more). Mark Nash UnwiredOnline.Net 350 Holly Street Junction City, OR 97448 http://www.uwol.net 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 9:43 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC At what point? Never. Your taxes (or tolls) go to pay for the right to use the road. The state charges extra registration for commercial vehicles, but they don't have the right to charge anyone more based on what they use the road for. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Mark Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 11:34 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC 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- 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:
Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC
What's Lingo/Slingbox/Netflix/Vonage/etc/etc/etc's cut every time you sign up a customer who is getting Internet access to get to Lingo / Slingbox / Netflix? You are making money off of them--no one gets Internet access to get to access to their ISPs portal and only their ISPs portal. 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- 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/
Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC
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. You cut comes from the subscriber who is your customer. The provider is already paying his piece to his ISP. Your customer is agreeing to faster download service by trading part of their upload bandwidth. This may be in violation of your TOS with that customer and hence your issue is with the customer not the content provider. 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. Easily solved, charge more to the customer. If they are using more bandwidth charge them more either via overages or raise your rates on unmetered service. 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. If net neutrality, as some people have been proposing here, is passed billing will have to migrate to either an overage/bit usage model or a dedicated pricing model. But the concept of no customer ever costing more than you collect from them is a bit dangerous. Where do you draw the line on evaluating cost? Pure bandwidth usage? What about tech support? Any business is about averages. Some customers require more support than others. If they are abusing that support or are a serious burden we will charge them for it. But I have notice that probably 90% of my customers I never hear from, about 5% have occasional problems, usually something different usually normal stuff and 5% are cronic service calls either billed or unbilled. I suppose I could 'fire' the 5% that are a burden but I do get good press from them in that they are the ones that will tell other people that we are always there when they need help. That type of advertising is hard to put a dollar on. If you are making the requirement that each customer must have x% profitability are you willing to reduce the cost to those customers that have in access of x%? Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless 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- 541-998-5599 fax 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/
Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC
Not to pick nits, but you web browser is not listening on port X after requesting a web page, it is waiting for a reply on a connection that it established with the web server. In other words I placed the phone call to the web server and it picked up the phone. The web browser is not answering the phone. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless David E. Smith wrote: Matt wrote: Don't most broadband Internet user agreements have a clause that says something like no servers? Is bittorrent a server? If you want to get really technical, there is no such thing as a server. :P There are programs that listen to certain TCP and UDP ports, but that's absolutely required for all Internet traffic anyway. (If you request a Web page, for instance, the request gets sent off, then your computer listens on a certain port, specifically the one it used to make the request, for a response. That's no different from their computer listening on, say, port 80 for people to request Web pages.) The customary definition would probably be program that listens of certain ports for requests all the time, but BitTorrent even cleverly circumvents that. Most BT clients can be configured not to listen, but they'll still send out parts of files to peers that they already know about, because perhaps they've already connected to that given peer to /download/ part of a file. I'm not aware of any BT clients that permit you to turn that off; in fact, most of them are configured to reward others' uploads. (If you're not uploading back to the swarm, other clients will shun you and your download speeds will be decreased.) While I imagine most of our contracts have no servers/daemons clauses, and you could technically use them to fire ANY customer (zomg your computer was listening on port 1234 right after you requested a Web page!) it's a bit of a heavy-handed way to solve the problem. (Anyone have a better way to solve the problem?) David Smith MVN.net 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/
RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures
Buy an Allot Box. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:57 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How do you identify it if it is encrypted? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:41 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Call Butch, We set ALL ptp traffic to share a single 128k connection. :-) laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Ron Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:58 PM Subject: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures To All, The issue of P2P rears its relatively unattractivehead in my neck of the woods from time to time. This is one of those times. - So, what is everyone doing to'counter' the influx of traffic from P2P? - What are the most effective P2P countermeasures that you have employed, lately? - For those fo you that respond, I will put it all in a file and make it available to all, via Scriv. Heck who should approve the dumpingofthat info onto WISPA - Rick Harnish - I'll checkwith him. Ron Wallace Hahnron, Inc. 220 S. Jackson Dt. Addison, MI 49220 Phone: (517)547-8410 Mobile: (517)605-4542 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/
RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures
How does the Allot box handle the encrypted ptp traffic Mike? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:48 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Buy an Allot Box. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:57 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How do you identify it if it is encrypted? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:41 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Call Butch, We set ALL ptp traffic to share a single 128k connection. :-) laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Ron Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:58 PM Subject: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures To All, The issue of P2P rears its relatively unattractivehead in my neck of the woods from time to time. This is one of those times. - So, what is everyone doing to'counter' the influx of traffic from P2P? - What are the most effective P2P countermeasures that you have employed, lately? - For those fo you that respond, I will put it all in a file and make it available to all, via Scriv. Heck who should approve the dumpingofthat info onto WISPA - Rick Harnish - I'll checkwith him. Ron Wallace Hahnron, Inc. 220 S. Jackson Dt. Addison, MI 49220 Phone: (517)547-8410 Mobile: (517)605-4542 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/ 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/
RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures
I haven't specifically tested it, but they say that the Deep Packet Inspection engine will mark and rate limit Encrypted Peer 2 Peer traffic. I know my AC-802 does a very good job of marking and shaping traffic. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:32 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How does the Allot box handle the encrypted ptp traffic Mike? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:48 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Buy an Allot Box. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:57 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How do you identify it if it is encrypted? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:41 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Call Butch, We set ALL ptp traffic to share a single 128k connection. :-) laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Ron Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:58 PM Subject: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures To All, The issue of P2P rears its relatively unattractivehead in my neck of the woods from time to time. This is one of those times. - So, what is everyone doing to'counter' the influx of traffic from P2P? - What are the most effective P2P countermeasures that you have employed, lately? - For those fo you that respond, I will put it all in a file and make it available to all, via Scriv. Heck who should approve the dumpingofthat info onto WISPA - Rick Harnish - I'll checkwith him. Ron Wallace Hahnron, Inc. 220 S. Jackson Dt. Addison, MI 49220 Phone: (517)547-8410 Mobile: (517)605-4542 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/ 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/
Re: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures
It must be based on ports or something, or perhaps anything encrypted that isn't related to tcp/443, udp/1 or other well known VPN/web ports is what they deem peer to peer. I would be interested to find out what they are doing. To my knowledge DPI on encrypted traffic tells you that, well, that it's encrypted. As it should ;) Mike Bushard, Jr wrote: I haven't specifically tested it, but they say that the Deep Packet Inspection engine will mark and rate limit Encrypted Peer 2 Peer traffic. I know my AC-802 does a very good job of marking and shaping traffic. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:32 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How does the Allot box handle the encrypted ptp traffic Mike? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:48 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Buy an Allot Box. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:57 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How do you identify it if it is encrypted? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:41 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Call Butch, We set ALL ptp traffic to share a single 128k connection. :-) laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Ron Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:58 PM Subject: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures To All, The issue of P2P rears its relatively unattractivehead in my neck of the woods from time to time. This is one of those times. - So, what is everyone doing to'counter' the influx of traffic from P2P? - What are the most effective P2P countermeasures that you have employed, lately? - For those fo you that respond, I will put it all in a file and make it available to all, via Scriv. Heck who should approve the dumpingofthat info onto WISPA - Rick Harnish - I'll checkwith him. Ron Wallace Hahnron, Inc. 220 S. Jackson Dt. Addison, MI 49220 Phone: (517)547-8410 Mobile: (517)605-4542 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/ 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!
RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures
I'd be very interested in knowing how they do that. The point of encryption is to mask the traffic, so layer 7 packet inspection should not be able to tell what is there. Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 3:44 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I haven't specifically tested it, but they say that the Deep Packet Inspection engine will mark and rate limit Encrypted Peer 2 Peer traffic. I know my AC-802 does a very good job of marking and shaping traffic. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:32 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How does the Allot box handle the encrypted ptp traffic Mike? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:48 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Buy an Allot Box. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:57 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How do you identify it if it is encrypted? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:41 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Call Butch, We set ALL ptp traffic to share a single 128k connection. :-) laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Ron Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:58 PM Subject: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures To All, The issue of P2P rears its relatively unattractivehead in my neck of the woods from time to time. This is one of those times. - So, what is everyone doing to'counter' the influx of traffic from P2P? - What are the most effective P2P countermeasures that you have employed, lately? - For those fo you that respond, I will put it all in a file and make it available to all, via Scriv. Heck who should approve the dumpingofthat info onto WISPA - Rick Harnish - I'll checkwith him. Ron Wallace Hahnron, Inc. 220 S. Jackson Dt. Addison, MI 49220 Phone: (517)547-8410 Mobile: (517)605-4542 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/ 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/
Re: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures
I believe the initial request is unencrypted, then the communication goes encrypted. Don't ask me for details, but this is what I've heard. Mark Nash UnwiredOnline.Net 350 Holly Street Junction City, OR 97448 http://www.uwol.net 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax - Original Message - From: Jeff Broadwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:54 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I'd be very interested in knowing how they do that. The point of encryption is to mask the traffic, so layer 7 packet inspection should not be able to tell what is there. Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 3:44 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I haven't specifically tested it, but they say that the Deep Packet Inspection engine will mark and rate limit Encrypted Peer 2 Peer traffic. I know my AC-802 does a very good job of marking and shaping traffic. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:32 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How does the Allot box handle the encrypted ptp traffic Mike? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:48 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Buy an Allot Box. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:57 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How do you identify it if it is encrypted? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:41 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Call Butch, We set ALL ptp traffic to share a single 128k connection. :-) laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Ron Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:58 PM Subject: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures To All, The issue of P2P rears its relatively unattractivehead in my neck of the woods from time to time. This is one of those times. - So, what is everyone doing to'counter' the influx of traffic from P2P? - What are the most effective P2P countermeasures that you have employed, lately? - For those fo you that respond, I will put it all in a file and make it available to all, via Scriv. Heck who should approve the dumpingofthat info onto WISPA - Rick Harnish - I'll checkwith him. Ron Wallace Hahnron, Inc. 220 S. Jackson Dt. Addison, MI 49220 Phone: (517)547-8410 Mobile: (517)605-4542 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- 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:
RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures
http://www.allot.com/index.php?option=com_docmantask=doc_downloadgid=25 Here is the Protocol List. They must be able to match some sort of signature. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:54 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I'd be very interested in knowing how they do that. The point of encryption is to mask the traffic, so layer 7 packet inspection should not be able to tell what is there. Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 3:44 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I haven't specifically tested it, but they say that the Deep Packet Inspection engine will mark and rate limit Encrypted Peer 2 Peer traffic. I know my AC-802 does a very good job of marking and shaping traffic. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:32 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How does the Allot box handle the encrypted ptp traffic Mike? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:48 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Buy an Allot Box. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:57 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How do you identify it if it is encrypted? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:41 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Call Butch, We set ALL ptp traffic to share a single 128k connection. :-) laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Ron Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:58 PM Subject: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures To All, The issue of P2P rears its relatively unattractivehead in my neck of the woods from time to time. This is one of those times. - So, what is everyone doing to'counter' the influx of traffic from P2P? - What are the most effective P2P countermeasures that you have employed, lately? - For those fo you that respond, I will put it all in a file and make it available to all, via Scriv. Heck who should approve the dumpingofthat info onto WISPA - Rick Harnish - I'll checkwith him. Ron Wallace Hahnron, Inc. 220 S. Jackson Dt. Addison, MI 49220 Phone: (517)547-8410 Mobile: (517)605-4542 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/
[WISPA] USB - Ethernet Adapters
I buy these and keep them in the truck to deal with the out-of-the-ordinary case where the customer does not have an ethernet port in their computer. I used a Startech, which has been discontinued. It was about $8. Anyone know of any others that are inexpensive and work well? Thanks in advance... Mark Nash UnwiredOnline.Net 350 Holly Street Junction City, OR 97448 http://www.uwol.net 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax 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/
RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures
If that is true, it would work. If you could match the handshake, you could track the connection form there. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Nash Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 3:06 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I believe the initial request is unencrypted, then the communication goes encrypted. Don't ask me for details, but this is what I've heard. Mark Nash UnwiredOnline.Net 350 Holly Street Junction City, OR 97448 http://www.uwol.net 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax - Original Message - From: Jeff Broadwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:54 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I'd be very interested in knowing how they do that. The point of encryption is to mask the traffic, so layer 7 packet inspection should not be able to tell what is there. Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 3:44 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I haven't specifically tested it, but they say that the Deep Packet Inspection engine will mark and rate limit Encrypted Peer 2 Peer traffic. I know my AC-802 does a very good job of marking and shaping traffic. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:32 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How does the Allot box handle the encrypted ptp traffic Mike? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:48 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Buy an Allot Box. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:57 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How do you identify it if it is encrypted? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:41 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Call Butch, We set ALL ptp traffic to share a single 128k connection. :-) laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Ron Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:58 PM Subject: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures To All, The issue of P2P rears its relatively unattractivehead in my neck of the woods from time to time. This is one of those times. - So, what is everyone doing to'counter' the influx of traffic from P2P? - What are the most effective P2P countermeasures that you have employed, lately? - For those fo you that respond, I will put it all in a file and make it available to all, via Scriv. Heck who should approve the dumpingofthat info onto WISPA - Rick Harnish - I'll checkwith him. Ron Wallace Hahnron, Inc. 220 S. Jackson Dt. Addison, MI 49220 Phone: (517)547-8410 Mobile: (517)605-4542 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- 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:
RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures
Looks like you have to have a password Mike, Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 4:14 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures http://www.allot.com/index.php?option=com_docmantask=doc_downloadgid=25 Here is the Protocol List. They must be able to match some sort of signature. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:54 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I'd be very interested in knowing how they do that. The point of encryption is to mask the traffic, so layer 7 packet inspection should not be able to tell what is there. Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 3:44 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I haven't specifically tested it, but they say that the Deep Packet Inspection engine will mark and rate limit Encrypted Peer 2 Peer traffic. I know my AC-802 does a very good job of marking and shaping traffic. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:32 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How does the Allot box handle the encrypted ptp traffic Mike? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:48 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Buy an Allot Box. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:57 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How do you identify it if it is encrypted? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:41 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Call Butch, We set ALL ptp traffic to share a single 128k connection. :-) laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Ron Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:58 PM Subject: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures To All, The issue of P2P rears its relatively unattractivehead in my neck of the woods from time to time. This is one of those times. - So, what is everyone doing to'counter' the influx of traffic from P2P? - What are the most effective P2P countermeasures that you have employed, lately? - For those fo you that respond, I will put it all in a file and make it available to all, via Scriv. Heck who should approve the dumpingofthat info onto WISPA - Rick Harnish - I'll checkwith him. Ron Wallace Hahnron, Inc. 220 S. Jackson Dt. Addison, MI 49220 Phone: (517)547-8410 Mobile: (517)605-4542 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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!
Re: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures
This sort of stuff uses a combination of ports, traffic heuristics (different types of traffic will have different traffic patterns--ie web browsing is intermittent, FTP may be sustained, p2p will have show a lot of simultaneos connections all over, most of which timeout, etc) and deep packet inspection. Deep packet inspection is marketing meaning they'll grab the first few packets from a Tcp or whatever session and analyze to see what type of traffic it is. It's quite simple stuff (once you brush all the marketing jumbo aside); if, for whatever reason (ie encryption) it can't use one of the above methods, it will just rely on the other two with the liability of less accurate results (resulting in some targetted traffic passing unfiltered and some untargetted traffic getting dropped). - Clint Ricker On Nov 20, 2007, at 3:54 PM, Jeff Broadwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd be very interested in knowing how they do that. The point of encryption is to mask the traffic, so layer 7 packet inspection should not be able to tell what is there. Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 3:44 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I haven't specifically tested it, but they say that the Deep Packet Inspection engine will mark and rate limit Encrypted Peer 2 Peer traffic. I know my AC-802 does a very good job of marking and shaping traffic. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:32 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How does the Allot box handle the encrypted ptp traffic Mike? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:48 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Buy an Allot Box. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:57 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How do you identify it if it is encrypted? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:41 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Call Butch, We set ALL ptp traffic to share a single 128k connection. :-) laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Ron Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:58 PM Subject: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures To All, The issue of P2P rears its relatively unattractivehead in my neck of the woods from time to time. This is one of those times. - So, what is everyone doing to'counter' the influx of traffic from P2P? - What are the most effective P2P countermeasures that you have employed, lately? - For those fo you that respond, I will put it all in a file and make it available to all, via Scriv. Heck who should approve the dumpingofthat info onto WISPA - Rick Harnish - I'll checkwith him. Ron Wallace Hahnron, Inc. 220 S. Jackson Dt. Addison, MI 49220 Phone: (517)547-8410 Mobile: (517)605-4542 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- --- -- 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:
Re: [WISPA] USB - Ethernet Adapters
The ones we use are about $14 or so thru DH. Mark Nash wrote: I buy these and keep them in the truck to deal with the out-of-the-ordinary case where the customer does not have an ethernet port in their computer. I used a Startech, which has been discontinued. It was about $8. Anyone know of any others that are inexpensive and work well? Thanks in advance... Mark Nash UnwiredOnline.Net 350 Holly Street Junction City, OR 97448 http://www.uwol.net 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax 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/ -- Blair Davis AOL IM Screen Name -- Theory240 West Michigan Wireless ISP 269-686-8648 A division of: Camp Communication Services, INC 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/
RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures
Probably...dang sales people! :-) I read over the brief, and I don't see any mention of encryption. Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 4:21 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I suppose they want to track you for sales purposes.. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 3:18 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Looks like you have to have a password Mike, Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 4:14 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures http://www.allot.com/index.php?option=com_docmantask=doc_downloadgid=25 Here is the Protocol List. They must be able to match some sort of signature. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:54 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I'd be very interested in knowing how they do that. The point of encryption is to mask the traffic, so layer 7 packet inspection should not be able to tell what is there. Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 3:44 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I haven't specifically tested it, but they say that the Deep Packet Inspection engine will mark and rate limit Encrypted Peer 2 Peer traffic. I know my AC-802 does a very good job of marking and shaping traffic. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:32 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How does the Allot box handle the encrypted ptp traffic Mike? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:48 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Buy an Allot Box. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:57 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How do you identify it if it is encrypted? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:41 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Call Butch, We set ALL ptp traffic to share a single 128k connection. :-) laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Ron Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:58 PM Subject: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures To All, The issue of P2P rears its relatively unattractivehead in my neck of the woods from time to time. This is one of those times. - So, what is everyone doing to'counter' the influx of traffic from P2P? - What are the most effective P2P countermeasures that you have employed, lately? - For those fo you that respond, I will put it all in a file and make it available to all, via Scriv. Heck who should approve the dumpingofthat info onto WISPA - Rick Harnish - I'll checkwith him. Ron Wallace Hahnron, Inc. 220 S. Jackson Dt. Addison, MI 49220 Phone: (517)547-8410 Mobile: (517)605-4542 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/
RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures
It's in the protocol list. I just read it before. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 3:34 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Probably...dang sales people! :-) I read over the brief, and I don't see any mention of encryption. Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 4:21 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I suppose they want to track you for sales purposes.. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 3:18 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Looks like you have to have a password Mike, Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 4:14 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures http://www.allot.com/index.php?option=com_docmantask=doc_downloadgid=25 Here is the Protocol List. They must be able to match some sort of signature. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:54 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I'd be very interested in knowing how they do that. The point of encryption is to mask the traffic, so layer 7 packet inspection should not be able to tell what is there. Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 3:44 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I haven't specifically tested it, but they say that the Deep Packet Inspection engine will mark and rate limit Encrypted Peer 2 Peer traffic. I know my AC-802 does a very good job of marking and shaping traffic. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:32 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How does the Allot box handle the encrypted ptp traffic Mike? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:48 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Buy an Allot Box. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:57 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How do you identify it if it is encrypted? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:41 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Call Butch, We set ALL ptp traffic to share a single 128k connection. :-) laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Ron Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:58 PM Subject: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures To All, The issue of P2P rears its relatively unattractivehead in my neck of the woods from time to time. This is one of those times. - So, what is everyone doing to'counter' the influx of traffic from P2P? - What are the most effective P2P countermeasures that you have employed, lately? - For those fo you that respond, I will put it all in a file and make it available to all, via Scriv. Heck who should approve the dumpingofthat info onto WISPA - Rick Harnish - I'll checkwith him. Ron Wallace Hahnron, Inc. 220 S. Jackson Dt. Addison, MI 49220 Phone: (517)547-8410 Mobile: (517)605-4542 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List:
RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures
Doh! I see it now. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 4:37 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures It's in the protocol list. I just read it before. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 3:34 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Probably...dang sales people! :-) I read over the brief, and I don't see any mention of encryption. Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 4:21 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I suppose they want to track you for sales purposes.. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 3:18 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Looks like you have to have a password Mike, Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 4:14 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures http://www.allot.com/index.php?option=com_docmantask=doc_downloadgid=25 Here is the Protocol List. They must be able to match some sort of signature. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:54 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I'd be very interested in knowing how they do that. The point of encryption is to mask the traffic, so layer 7 packet inspection should not be able to tell what is there. Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 3:44 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I haven't specifically tested it, but they say that the Deep Packet Inspection engine will mark and rate limit Encrypted Peer 2 Peer traffic. I know my AC-802 does a very good job of marking and shaping traffic. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:32 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How does the Allot box handle the encrypted ptp traffic Mike? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:48 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Buy an Allot Box. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:57 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How do you identify it if it is encrypted? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:41 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Call Butch, We set ALL ptp traffic to share a single 128k connection. :-) laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Ron Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:58 PM Subject: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures To All, The issue of P2P rears its relatively unattractivehead in my neck of the woods from time to time. This is one of those times. - So, what is everyone doing to'counter' the influx of traffic from P2P? - What are the most effective P2P countermeasures that you have employed, lately? - For those fo you that respond, I will put it all in a file and make it available to all, via Scriv. Heck who should approve the dumpingofthat info onto WISPA - Rick Harnish - I'll checkwith him. Ron Wallace Hahnron, Inc. 220 S. Jackson Dt. Addison, MI 49220 Phone: (517)547-8410 Mobile: (517)605-4542 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures
See, I'm Not always crazy. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 3:43 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Doh! I see it now. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 4:37 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures It's in the protocol list. I just read it before. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 3:34 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Probably...dang sales people! :-) I read over the brief, and I don't see any mention of encryption. Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 4:21 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I suppose they want to track you for sales purposes.. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 3:18 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Looks like you have to have a password Mike, Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 4:14 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures http://www.allot.com/index.php?option=com_docmantask=doc_downloadgid=25 Here is the Protocol List. They must be able to match some sort of signature. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:54 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I'd be very interested in knowing how they do that. The point of encryption is to mask the traffic, so layer 7 packet inspection should not be able to tell what is there. Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 3:44 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures I haven't specifically tested it, but they say that the Deep Packet Inspection engine will mark and rate limit Encrypted Peer 2 Peer traffic. I know my AC-802 does a very good job of marking and shaping traffic. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:32 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How does the Allot box handle the encrypted ptp traffic Mike? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:48 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Buy an Allot Box. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:57 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How do you identify it if it is encrypted? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:41 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Call Butch, We set ALL ptp traffic to share a single 128k connection. :-) laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Ron Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:58 PM Subject: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures To All, The issue of P2P rears its relatively unattractivehead in my neck of the woods from time to time. This is one of those times. - So, what is everyone doing to'counter' the influx of traffic from P2P? - What are the most effective P2P countermeasures that you have employed, lately? - For those fo you that respond, I will put it all in a
[WISPA] Wi-Fi Linked to Autism
Sounds like the old cell phone scares: http://www.crunchgear.com/2007/11/20/wi-fi-causing-autism/ Jeff 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/
Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC
Sure they do. The more gas you use, the more gas TAX you pay. grin marlon - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 10:24 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC Right, so that's why you charge a commercial account more than a residential. A car that drives 60 miles to work every day puts more wear and tear on the road than the commercial truck that drives across town once a week, but the state doesn't charge them any different. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Mark Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:04 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC You're right, Mike. Never. I understand that, and I guess my previous post kind of eluded to me thinking that way. The second part of your analogy is perfect for my point... The state charges extra registration. They charge more for the frequency and the way they use the road (heavier vehicles abuse the road more). Mark Nash UnwiredOnline.Net 350 Holly Street Junction City, OR 97448 http://www.uwol.net 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 9:43 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC At what point? Never. Your taxes (or tolls) go to pay for the right to use the road. The state charges extra registration for commercial vehicles, but they don't have the right to charge anyone more based on what they use the road for. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Mark Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 11:34 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC 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- 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:
Re: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures
Grin It's not a perfect solution. What we'll be looking at next is a device that will allow us to track who the high users are in real time. Once they've passed a certain point, say 512k non stop for an hour, we'll start to slow them down more and more till they are a dialup speeds. Then, once they shut things down for a couple of hours it'll ratchet back up. The reality of the situation is that there isn't enough capacity out there for everyone to watch real time broadcast quality tv, download a new movie twice a night, talk on the phone etc. etc. etc. all at once. We have to MANAGE what happens and TEACH people to use more efficient technologies. PPV or broadcasting is a GREAT way to watch video content or listen to the radio. The internet wasn't designed for this and isn't up to speed for it. And with such limited spectrum and a HUGE installed base of relatively slow and inefficient radios out there already, it's an issue. I think that even the customers would agree that some limitations on service would be MUCH better than going back to the old dialup days or to DSL/Cable. And those are the only choices available for a lot of the people we're talking about. Sooner than later we're gonna see the big boys doing these things too. Right now things are still growing fast for all of us. And those guys will do ANYTHING to bring on the customer base. When that growth starts to slow down though, look out. IF they can rebuild their networks (again) fast enough to keep up with usage it may be no big deal. My guess is that they're gonna have to get really aggressive with customer control though. I give it another 2 to 3 years, then the market will be mostly saturated. So far things for broadband here are tracking very similarly to dialup as far as growth goes. But this time there is no better mouse trap on the horizon. Sure fiber's great, but no one thinks it's good enough to string it out to everyone in the next few years. 30 years from now? 15 even? Who knows. But I think the next 5 are looking pretty dang good. Especially with some of the cool new gear that we can start overlaying with our current stuff and let people upgrade to. laters, marlon P.S. Yeah, I noticed the Commiecast address. deep sigh SOMEBODY get this poor schmuck a real account! lol - Original Message - From: Jeff Broadwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 10:56 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures How do you identify it if it is encrypted? Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:41 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures Call Butch, We set ALL ptp traffic to share a single 128k connection. :-) laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Ron Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:58 PM Subject: [WISPA] P2P Countermeasures To All, The issue of P2P rears its relatively unattractivehead in my neck of the woods from time to time. This is one of those times. - So, what is everyone doing to'counter' the influx of traffic from P2P? - What are the most effective P2P countermeasures that you have employed, lately? - For those fo you that respond, I will put it all in a file and make it available to all, via Scriv. Heck who should approve the dumpingofthat info onto WISPA - Rick Harnish - I'll checkwith him. Ron Wallace Hahnron, Inc. 220 S. Jackson Dt. Addison, MI 49220 Phone: (517)547-8410 Mobile: (517)605-4542 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/
Re: [WISPA] 3650
All, Airspan has submitted for the lower band ( higher power ) and supposedly been given the thumbs up for their hipermax product and will be submitting for micromaxE as well. Airspan supports the full 5w output power on 10mhz and 10 watt output power on 20mhz, as well as mimo. Currently Airspan is the only product in 3.65ghz with MIMO support that I know of that can get indoors to a consumer CPE @ a 2-3 mile cell ( 95% availability NLOS ) that actually is shipping TODAY. Hipermax will be suited for metropolitan tier 1-5 operators while micromax will be suited for rural operators, or smaller operators. Hipermax operates as an 802.16d/e product at the same time while micromax is either d or e. My understanding is redline will be submitting for their 802.16e product as well, but is only currently certified for the upper 25mhz, not the lower 25mhz and the radios are only 30dbm. ( airspan hipermax is up to 4x 40dbm, mimo matrix A / B ) ( micromax is 2x2 MIMO matrix A / B 36dbm ) No comment on Aperto's status, I have no clear idea when and if they will be coming out with 3.65ghz product, my current understsanding is their focus is on 5..8 fixed wimax in the USA and thats it for now. To purchase Airspan, Wireless guys www.wirelessguys.com apparently is carrying them now. To purchase redline call one of your local redline dealers. - Jeff - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 5:08 AM Subject: [WISPA] 3650 Now that P15 is reporting that 3650 is available, who all makes equipment for it? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com 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/
RE: [WISPA] 3650 PtMP vs. 2.4 PtMP
Mike Standard 3.65Ghz OFDM does not work as well as 2.4Ghz OFDM but it's better than 5Ghz OFDM. Right now we see 3.65Ghz as a great replacement for areas that have issues with LOS 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz business level users as well as PtP back haul links. This is simply because in most areas there is little to no source of interference where the signal to noise levels are going to be 25dBm+! And of course you have very little to worry about when it comes to new sites coming on line, for one you will know who and where they are plus the rules states very clearly licenses holders must work together. Sincerely, Tony Morella Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008 http://www.demarctech.com This communication constitutes an electronic communication within the meaning of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC 2510, and its disclosure is strictly limited to the recipient intended by the sender of this message. This communication may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient and receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient does not constitute a loss of the confidential or privileged nature of the communication. Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please contact the sender by return electronic mail and delete all copies of this communication -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 12:16 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 PtMP vs. 2.4 PtMP Who has used 3650 in a true PtMP residential customer application? How does it really work compared to 2.4? Next year I'm putting up 2 more towers and had planned on 2.4 GHz 90* sectors. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com 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/
Re: [WISPA] 3650 PtMP vs. 2.4 PtMP
That's pretty much what I thought it would be for, hence the 2 mile radius indoor CPE just isn't going to fly. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] 3650 PtMP vs. 2.4 PtMP Mike Standard 3.65Ghz OFDM does not work as well as 2.4Ghz OFDM but it's better than 5Ghz OFDM. Right now we see 3.65Ghz as a great replacement for areas that have issues with LOS 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz business level users as well as PtP back haul links. This is simply because in most areas there is little to no source of interference where the signal to noise levels are going to be 25dBm+! And of course you have very little to worry about when it comes to new sites coming on line, for one you will know who and where they are plus the rules states very clearly licenses holders must work together. Sincerely, Tony Morella Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008 http://www.demarctech.com This communication constitutes an electronic communication within the meaning of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC 2510, and its disclosure is strictly limited to the recipient intended by the sender of this message. This communication may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient and receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient does not constitute a loss of the confidential or privileged nature of the communication. Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please contact the sender by return electronic mail and delete all copies of this communication -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 12:16 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 PtMP vs. 2.4 PtMP Who has used 3650 in a true PtMP residential customer application? How does it really work compared to 2.4? Next year I'm putting up 2 more towers and had planned on 2.4 GHz 90* sectors. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com 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/
Re: [WISPA] 3650 PtMP vs. 2.4 PtMP
An experimental license allows you to test systems, spectrum, or techniques that otherwise aren't normally allowed. I know of a number of service providers that used their 3650 experimental licenses for commercial service. As I understand it, commercial operations aren't DISALLOWED by the Part 5 experimental license rules. What those rules DO state is that the Part 5 license doesn't give you any special preference whatsoever when the FCC deems that the period of your experimental license is up... like it would be now that the 3650 rules are set and commercial service is commencing. Those experimental deployments that I heard about were PMP for backhaul and for access for business customers; I haven't heard of any 3650 residential deployments, though that would be feasible using 3.5 Fixed WiMAX CPE that has been updated for 3650 rules. It was kept pretty quiet, except with the vendors that were supplying experimentally compliant 3650 gear, but there were MANY larger Broadband Wireless Internet Access Service Providers who used experimental licenses similar to Covad's rationale quoted in Dylan Oliver's message. While all those deployments had to be similarly couched in yes, we acknowledge it's experimental... language, they all used such systems for commercial, revenue service... THAT was the experiment - to see if it was feasible, economical, and reliable. It worked; looks like 3650 will be quite the success, especially with the mandated coordination / non-interference between competing service providers in urban areas. Thanks, Steve On Nov 19, 2007 12:39 PM, Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Those of that have using experimental licenses only got to test things such as propagation. We where not allowed to provide commercial services. Anyone who might have used their license incorrectly is certainly not going to admit to it on a public list. Therefore, your question cannot be answered. -Matt -- Steve Stroh Editor / Analyst, Stroh Publications LLC 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.stevestroh.com 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/
Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC
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- 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/ -- 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/
Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC
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- 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/
Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC
I've never had much luck selling anything other than fast and really fast connections. When it comes to residential anything more than 2 or 3 plans seems to overwhelm the average user. They want either as fast as they can afford or they want something pretty cheap because all they do is check email and occasionally browse the web. Most customers don't know what 'burstable' is and they could care less, the just want it to go fast. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless 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. 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/
Re: [WISPA] Vuze / Comcast / Peer to Peer / FCC
If you look at most TOS or SAs you will see a maximum monthly cap on traffic. I know that both Cox and Time Warner have it on cable. That said I don't know of anyone personally that has been penalized for an overage. I think the clause is there though so that they can take measures if they are dealing with abuse. I have a cap on my service but very seldom have I charged an overage fee for the few users that have exceeded it. But it is there if I have a customer that gets out of line. The only bandwidth shaping I do is rate limiting as well. I have turned on p2p throttling on rare occasions when there has been an issue, but it is usually when the Nebraska Public Power people are in town for something. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless 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 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/
