ISP throttling by data type?

[shmokes]

I hate my internet. It constantly feels inadequate, particularly for video. I can't get through a YouTube or Comedy Central clip without the video stopping to buffer (often for a long time). But a speed test at speedtest.net, for example, says I'm getting almost 14 Mbps down with a 22 ms ping. That's not gonna break any speed records, but it seems perfectly respectable, and it's damned expensive ($70/mo.). Do you think there's any chance my speeds are being throttled for specific activities, so speedtest shows 13 Mbps down, but when Comcast sees me streaming video they limit me to like 3 Mbps down for that traffic? Is there any software that can measure my throughput on my end, specifically as my data is flowing in?

[ChadTower]

It's technically possible but not likely for stuff like youtube.  I know some ISPs throttle things like torrents.  No reason to throttle Youtube as that's a pretty optimized streaming app.  More than likely your issue is in the container itself.  I have seen Chrome totally choke on some types of media streaming that Firefox could play very well.  Then Firefox will play a different type and end up leaking memory like a waterfall but Chrome loves it.  Anything using the Adobe apps, stuff like Shockwave and Flash, are always a pain in the ass because they leak memory horribly.

Definitely try all three major browsers on the same video and see what happens. 

[Le Chuck]

Why wouldn't they?  Data is money. 

Shmokes, have you tried any of these? I think Glasnost might be right up your alley.

[ChadTower]

Why wouldn't they?  Data is money. 

Because throttling a super popular and legit service would make for some very unhappy customers and potential lawsuits from both customers and the service provider.

[MonMotha]

It sounds like you're probably a Comcast user?  AT&T does this on their U-Verse service, too, but not nearly as badly.

Comcast has a REALLY complicated prioritization/QoS scheme designed to make their network look faster than it is (it's oversold WAY more than most carrier metrics would advise even for consumer access).  They don't publish details, but it's something like this:

Highest priority

• DNS lookups to their own DNS servers (which IIRC return an ad-serving domain instead of NXDOMAIN)
• speedtest.net (extra "powerboost")
• Comcast's own IP VOD service (when used on your PC, tablet, etc. - when on their STB it doesn't hit the DOCSIS network at all, AFAIK)
  
• Hulu (Note: Comcast has an ownership interest in this)
• Misc. HTTP traffic not otherwise categorized
• Other not otherwise categorized TCP traffic and some known UDP and bare IP traffic ("general traffic")
• Bittorrent leeching (Seeding is essentially blocked - see below)
• UDP traffic including DNS not directed to their servers.  Some well-known VPNs are excepted.
• Youtube, Ustream, Netflix, etc.

Lowest priority

Note: When you transition from leeching to seeding Bittorrent on Comcast, they will throw false TCP resets at you essentially destroying all connections.  You can fix this by just blocking TCP resets to your bittorrent ports with a packet filter. You'll end up with a bunch of half-open connections, but it pretty much works.

You can get around this in a couple ways, both of which cost money:

• Buy their "Business Class" service: it has a much flatter QoS structure.  You also get some other perks like a minimal SLA, better restoration times, no caps (irrelevant right now), allowed to host servers, etc.
• Tunnel everything over a VPN (e.g. IPSec) to another server in a colo somewhere.  This adds latency, but Comcast just sees it all as VPN traffic, which they tend to leave alone.  This is also a pain to set up if you don't know what you're doing.

AT&T's priority structure is a bit flatter, but it still puts Youtube at the bottom.  Since their own IPTV service competes for the same bandwidth (everything runs over the same middle-mile network), it's ALWAYS at the top.  Fortunately, it seems to be their transit/peering links that are vastly oversubscribed, not their middle-mile network (apparently 10GbE rings with about 5-10 VDSL neighborhood POPs on them typically).  Their network seems to, for now at least, put IPv6-in-IPv4 tunneled traffic squarely in the middle, ignoring the IPv6 content itself, so you can just get a tunnel to e.g. HE.net (free) and repair some broken-ness if you're willing to put up with the additional latency.

You can also use a different service provider if one's available, but I know AT&T pulls this BS, too.  "Real" service (e.g. bonded T1, T3, Packet-over-SONET, Metro-E, etc.) will never do this to you, but you probably don't want to see the price on those.

[Le Chuck]

Why wouldn't they?  Data is money. 

Because throttling a super popular and legit service would make for some very unhappy customers and potential lawsuits from both customers and the service provider.

And what law would the ISP be in violation of o' Chad?

[SavannahLion]

Just thinking about the stunning amount of crap Comcast puts their customers through ....... I really shouldn't say any more. 

[SNAAKE]

you should call and see if there is a cap. you can ask them to remove the cap. tell them you wanna cancel the service if its like that.

I am on 60mb connection without any issues

[BadMouth]

This explains a lot with my comcast service.

I could stream youtube videos fine over 4G on my phone, but they would stop and start via wi-fi.
Thought it was my ancient modem and router, so I spent money on a new DOCSIS 3.0 one.

Still can't watch a high def youtube video without pausing it to buffer, but I can stream amazon video in high def with dolby digital surround. 

[SavannahLion]

you should call and see if there is a cap. you can ask them to remove the cap. tell them you wanna cancel the service if its like that.

I am on 60mb connection without any issues

That would work if Comcast wasn't the only game in town. It took years for my area to receive any sort of cable service even though people just a stones throw down the same street had service. When cable was finally introduced (@home) it would take at least..... IIRC seven or so years before anything other than ISDN or cable was an option.

The amount of money one pays for even a "meager" 12mb connection is a damn joke.

[ChadTower]

Because throttling a super popular and legit service would make for some very unhappy customers and potential lawsuits from both customers and the service provider.

And what law would the ISP be in violation of o' Chad?

Doesn't have to be in violation of the law in order for a civil suit to be brought.

Reasonably, though, it could be in violation of any number of fair trade or service disclosure laws, depending on the amount of viable ISP options customers have in a given area.  And a lot of civil suits are merely to force someone to the negotiating table.  This could fall in there too if it came from Youtube.

Don't forget that Comcast is not the big kid on this block.  Youtube is much, much bigger, as they are owned by Google.

[Le Chuck]

You have no idea what you're blabbering about.

Name one civil suit against an ISP for throttling, individual or class action.

[ChadTower]

You have no idea what you're blabbering about.

Name one civil suit against an ISP for throttling, individual or class action.

Not interested in continuing the debate like this.      Maybe we can discuss civil law later should you attempt being civil yourself.

[Le Chuck]

You have no idea what you're blabbering about.

Name one civil suit against an ISP for throttling, individual or class action.

Not interested in continuing the debate like this.      Maybe we can discuss civil law later should you attempt being civil yourself.

That's cool.  I'll debate your side too since you clearly are lost:

In 2007 there was such a case against Comcast by the FCC.  The court ruled in the FCC's favor against Comcast thereby limiting Comcast's power to manage their network.  This decision was tossed out in 2010 and then the FCC instituted new rules that directly affected throttling of certain websites/types of media on DSL networks and some mobile networks.

My side:
Since then several carriers including Verizon have challenged these new rules on Net Neutrality which have been in effect for a little under a year.  Under the new net neutrality the customer must be made aware of what types of media can be throttled by the ISP.  That is not to say that throttling is illegal, only that when the customer enters into an agreement to gain internet access from a company the onus is on the company to inform what type of throttling is to be expected.  This is done through those exceedingly long service contract agreements that nobody reads anymore.  If you don't like your throttling there is an open market and you are free to go elsewhere if available. 

One can be civil and say that throttling doesn't happen and talk in generalities but one would be wrong. 

[RayB]

speedtest.net is no longer reliable. You'll find out what speed your service is capable of, but not what youre actually getting. Try this one:

http://www.bandwidthplace.com/

[Gray_Area]

Sort of an aside, and confirming....mmm lil shawn's....or was it SNAAKE's?.....comment about general throttling.....yes they do. That is, they have paid for the throughput, and can offer at least three or four times what they provide. I recently had dinner with a guy who does site repair for T-Mobile and (remembering the above-mentioned comment about throttling) asked him that, and he said 'yup, the engineers told me'.