Alex Balashov wrote:
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/01/richard_bennett_utorrent_udp/
>
> FUD? Interesting? Boring? New news? Old news?
>
>
Seems the sky isn't falling (yet). The original article didn't have the
full story, here's an update...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/0
Ira wrote:
> At 12:44 PM 12/2/2008, you wrote:
>
>> At 04:03 12/2/2008, Benny Amorsen wrote:
>> >Doug <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> >> "Net Neutrality" is great in principle. But ISP's need to
>> >> somehow control those few percentage of users who suck down
>> >> a huge majority of
At 12:44 PM 12/2/2008, you wrote:
>At 04:03 12/2/2008, Benny Amorsen wrote:
> >Doug <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> "Net Neutrality" is great in principle. But ISP's need to
> >> somehow control those few percentage of users who suck down
> >> a huge majority of the bandwidth. It's doll
Doug wrote:
> At 07:00 12/2/2008, SIP wrote:
> >Doug wrote:
> >> At 18:56 12/1/2008, Tilghman Lesher wrote:
> >> >On Monday 01 December 2008 06:21:33 pm Doug wrote:
> >> >> We tell our customers that they are not allowed to
> >> >> download copyrighted material.
> >> >
> >> >So your cus
At 07:57 12/2/2008, Andrew Kohlsmith (lists) wrote:
>On December 1, 2008 07:21:33 pm Doug wrote:
>> Hmmm. When our users are pounding the network
>> with BitTorrent traffic, we just shut them down
>> and wait for them to complain. It's against our
>> Acceptable Use Policy, and causes all sor
Doug wrote:
> At 04:03 12/2/2008, Benny Amorsen wrote:
> >Doug <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> "Net Neutrality" is great in principle. But ISP's need to
> >> somehow control those few percentage of users who suck down
> >> a huge majority of the bandwidth. It's dollars and cents.
> >
>
At 07:00 12/2/2008, SIP wrote:
>Doug wrote:
>> At 18:56 12/1/2008, Tilghman Lesher wrote:
>> >On Monday 01 December 2008 06:21:33 pm Doug wrote:
>> >> We tell our customers that they are not allowed to
>> >> download copyrighted material.
>> >
>> >So your customers are only allowed to d
At 04:03 12/2/2008, Benny Amorsen wrote:
>Doug <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> "Net Neutrality" is great in principle. But ISP's need to
>> somehow control those few percentage of users who suck down
>> a huge majority of the bandwidth. It's dollars and cents.
>
>Yes, just like the airlin
On December 1, 2008 07:21:33 pm Doug wrote:
> Hmmm. When our users are pounding the network
> with BitTorrent traffic, we just shut them down
> and wait for them to complain. It's against our
> Acceptable Use Policy, and causes all sorts of
> VOIP headaches.
As someone who is the technical lead
Doug wrote:
> At 18:56 12/1/2008, Tilghman Lesher wrote:
> >On Monday 01 December 2008 06:21:33 pm Doug wrote:
> >> We tell our customers that they are not allowed to
> >> download copyrighted material.
> >
> >So your customers are only allowed to download public domain
> >material? That kin
Doug <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Net Neutrality" is great in principle. But ISP's need to
> somehow control those few percentage of users who suck down
> a huge majority of the bandwidth. It's dollars and cents.
Yes, just like the airlines need to somehow control those users who
keep showing
At 18:56 12/1/2008, Tilghman Lesher wrote:
>On Monday 01 December 2008 06:21:33 pm Doug wrote:
>> We tell our customers that they are not allowed to
>> download copyrighted material.
>
>So your customers are only allowed to download public domain
>material? That kind of restricts the amount
BJ Weschke wrote:
> Alex Balashov wrote:
>> RE Kushner List Account wrote:
>>
>>
>>> The question is, what are you actually paying for as a customer? To
>>> discriminate against bits just because they actually use what they are
>>> paying for is beyond me.
>>>
>>> At least a bandwidth cap is
Alex Balashov wrote:
> RE Kushner List Account wrote:
>
>
>> The question is, what are you actually paying for as a customer? To
>> discriminate against bits just because they actually use what they are
>> paying for is beyond me.
>>
>> At least a bandwidth cap is easier to understand. You ge
RE Kushner List Account wrote:
> The question is, what are you actually paying for as a customer? To
> discriminate against bits just because they actually use what they are
> paying for is beyond me.
>
> At least a bandwidth cap is easier to understand. You get what you pay for.
Speaking as
Igor Widlinski wrote:
> Awesome, I always wanted to see this "law" in real life.
>
>
Technically I didn't call him THAT guy. I was thinking of that recently
elected Chicago street thug who speaks before large crowds at night.
Just spend ten seconds on YouTube and you'll see it's not my origin
On Monday 01 December 2008 06:21:33 pm Doug wrote:
> We tell our customers that they are not allowed to
> download copyrighted material.
So your customers are only allowed to download public domain
material? That kind of restricts the amount of information
available on the Internet. Nitpick: ju
Awesome, I always wanted to see this "law" in real life.
Thank You!!
Alex Balashov wrote:
> RE Kushner List Account wrote:
>
>> Doug wrote:
>>
>>> Why the BitTorrent guys want to give themselves
>>> even a worse reputation is beyond me. We tell
>>> our customers that they are not allowed
Alex Balashov wrote:
> RE Kushner List Account wrote:
>
>> Doug wrote:
>>
>>> Why the BitTorrent guys want to give themselves
>>> even a worse reputation is beyond me. We tell
>>> our customers that they are not allowed to
>>> download copyrighted material. But for other,
>>> legal BitTorre
RE Kushner List Account wrote:
> Doug wrote:
>> Why the BitTorrent guys want to give themselves
>> even a worse reputation is beyond me. We tell
>> our customers that they are not allowed to
>> download copyrighted material. But for other,
>> legal BitTorrent transfers, we suggest that
>> they us
Doug wrote:
> Why the BitTorrent guys want to give themselves
> even a worse reputation is beyond me. We tell
> our customers that they are not allowed to
> download copyrighted material. But for other,
> legal BitTorrent transfers, we suggest that
> they use the scheduling feature of uTorrent to
At 12:34 12/1/2008, Alex Balashov wrote:
>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/01/richard_bennett_utorrent_udp/
>
>FUD? Interesting? Boring? New news? Old news?
Hmmm. When our users are pounding the network
with BitTorrent traffic, we just shut them down
and wait for them to complain. It'
Sounds possible, but as a user of uTorrent, I have yet to see this "feature"
It may simply be that I havnt looked hard enough.
I can say, that I still have to have a tcp port routed for uTorrent to work
properly.
I may post an update, If I notice a change in this behavour.
--Christopher Dobbs
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/01/richard_bennett_utorrent_udp/
FUD? Interesting? Boring? New news? Old news?
--
Alex Balashov
Evariste Systems
Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/
Tel: (+1) (678) 954-0670
Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671
Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599
_
24 matches
Mail list logo
