<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Comcast Hijacks Bandwidth Management</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.hact.net/2008/03/27/comcast-hijacks-bandwidth-management/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.hact.net/2008/03/27/comcast-hijacks-bandwidth-management/</link>
	<description>Aaron Huslage's take on things</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 00:16:32 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=MU</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Comcast Shift a Nod to Political, Competitive Realities &#124; Favorite-Articles.com</title>
		<link>http://blog.hact.net/2008/03/27/comcast-hijacks-bandwidth-management/#comment-47</link>
		<dc:creator>Comcast Shift a Nod to Political, Competitive Realities &#124; Favorite-Articles.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 May 2008 08:54:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://huslage.wordpress.com/?p=34#comment-47</guid>
		<description>[...] Blogger Aaron Huslage says the agreement in essence is a PR ploy. The real issue is Comcast&#8217;s failure to upgrade its network. The company, he says, &#8220;has done a clever thing? by shifting the argument from the root issue, which is a lack of investment. In this view, P2P-related capacity issues are a symptom, not a cause , of the problem. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Blogger Aaron Huslage says the agreement in essence is a PR ploy. The real issue is Comcast&#8217;s failure to upgrade its network. The company, he says, &#8220;has done a clever thing? by shifting the argument from the root issue, which is a lack of investment. In this view, P2P-related capacity issues are a symptom, not a cause , of the problem. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Comcast Shift a Nod to Political, Competitive Realities &#124; Homeownerloanmax.com</title>
		<link>http://blog.hact.net/2008/03/27/comcast-hijacks-bandwidth-management/#comment-45</link>
		<dc:creator>Comcast Shift a Nod to Political, Competitive Realities &#124; Homeownerloanmax.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 17:33:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://huslage.wordpress.com/?p=34#comment-45</guid>
		<description>[...] Blogger Aaron Huslage says the agreement in essence is a PR ploy. The real issue is Comcast&#8217;s failure to upgrade its network. The company, he says, &#8220;has done a clever thing? by shifting the argument from the root issue, which is a lack of investment. In this view, P2P-related capacity issues are a symptom, not a cause , of the problem. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Blogger Aaron Huslage says the agreement in essence is a PR ploy. The real issue is Comcast&#8217;s failure to upgrade its network. The company, he says, &#8220;has done a clever thing? by shifting the argument from the root issue, which is a lack of investment. In this view, P2P-related capacity issues are a symptom, not a cause , of the problem. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Comcast: Not A Member Of The Fat, Dumb Pipe Club</title>
		<link>http://blog.hact.net/2008/03/27/comcast-hijacks-bandwidth-management/#comment-44</link>
		<dc:creator>Comcast: Not A Member Of The Fat, Dumb Pipe Club</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2008 07:02:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://huslage.wordpress.com/?p=34#comment-44</guid>
		<description>[...] My friend Aaron Huslage points out this means is that they&#8217;re still shaping traffic. I agree with that assessment. On the other hand, they are deploying DOCSIS 3.0 to roughly 20% of their service area. Since that&#8217;s going to push more bandwidth to the end user, you&#8217;d think you&#8217;d think they&#8217;d have to upgrade their core by a commensurate amount&#8211;at least in those areas. Then again, they&#8217;ve cocked things like this up before. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] My friend Aaron Huslage points out this means is that they&#8217;re still shaping traffic. I agree with that assessment. On the other hand, they are deploying DOCSIS 3.0 to roughly 20% of their service area. Since that&#8217;s going to push more bandwidth to the end user, you&#8217;d think you&#8217;d think they&#8217;d have to upgrade their core by a commensurate amount&#8211;at least in those areas. Then again, they&#8217;ve cocked things like this up before. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Comcast Shift a Nod to Political, Competitive Realities &#124; Internetcolor</title>
		<link>http://blog.hact.net/2008/03/27/comcast-hijacks-bandwidth-management/#comment-39</link>
		<dc:creator>Comcast Shift a Nod to Political, Competitive Realities &#124; Internetcolor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 10:31:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://huslage.wordpress.com/?p=34#comment-39</guid>
		<description>[...] Blogger Aaron Huslage says the agreement in essence is a PR ploy. The real issue is Comcast&#8217;s failure to upgrade its network. The company, he says, &#8220;has done a clever thing? by shifting the argument from the root issue, which is a lack of investment. In this view, P2P-related capacity issues are a symptom, not a cause , of the problem. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Blogger Aaron Huslage says the agreement in essence is a PR ploy. The real issue is Comcast&#8217;s failure to upgrade its network. The company, he says, &#8220;has done a clever thing? by shifting the argument from the root issue, which is a lack of investment. In this view, P2P-related capacity issues are a symptom, not a cause , of the problem. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robb Topolski</title>
		<link>http://blog.hact.net/2008/03/27/comcast-hijacks-bandwidth-management/#comment-35</link>
		<dc:creator>Robb Topolski</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2008 17:56:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://huslage.wordpress.com/?p=34#comment-35</guid>
		<description>I'm yelling! 

 Just by way of re-introduction if necessary, I'm probably a key figure
 as to why we're all talking about Network Neutrality again.  I was having a
 problem uploading on Gnutella in early 2007.  I tracked it down to
 Comcast using Sandvine-injected RST packets and documented it.  Blog
 stories led to press stories which led to independent confirmation.
 And here we are today.

 Today Comcast and BitTorrent seems to have solved world hunger -- and
 I'd love nothing more than to be optimistic about it.  But I cannot
 be.  As they say on Slashdot -- show video, or it didn't happen.  This
 deal is treachery, relies on how much we can trust the word of
 Comcast, and leaves the public interests out in the cold.

 I think it's strange that anyone believes a word that Comcast says.
 This is the Comcast that:

 1. Told the FCC in 2005 that they would not degrade traffic in order
 to convince the FCC that network neutrality regulations were not
 needed.  They told the Justice Committee the same thing in 2006.

 2. Started degrading P2P traffic in 2006, and failed to
 tell anyone what they were doing.

 3. Used a system that utilized forgery, and successfully placed blame
 on the other peer instead of Comcast.

 4. Denied it when caught.

 5. Then changed their story when the denials were not believed, but
 still never came out and said what they were doing.

 6. Then they justified their actions by throwing their other
 Cable-Internet brothers and sisters under the bus with their "they do
 it too!" defense

 7. Then stealthily changed the AUP days before an FCC filing where
 they referred to the new provisions.

 8. When the changed AUP started getting press attention, they stated
 that a prominent story on Comcast.net alerted millions of visitors of
 the change and accused Marvin Ammori of crying wolf. (Google cache
 proved that nothing alerted users to the changed AUP until the day
 after the press started asking questions.)

 9. Then they packed the Harvard FCC hearing.

 This company has not demonstrated that you can trust its promises, nor
 can you believe its assertions. Comcast just used BitTorrent Inc. as a
 tool to try and defang the FCC.

 BitTorrent Inc. is a content provider. Vuze, who actually DID make a
 complaint and petition to the FCC, is a competitor. Neither
 BitTorrent, Vuze, nor Comcast represents the interests of 12 million
 Comcast users nor the The Internet Society nor the public. And this
 middle-of-the-night deal was made without their input.

 Nothing has changed. The RST interference continues. It was a wrongful
 act. BitTorrent Inc. has no right making a deal with Comcast allowing
 it to continue to commit wrongful acts until it finally decides it is
 ready to stop. The correct relief is to stop the interference
 immediately and to FULLY DISCLOSE what it did and to accept
 responsibility for those actions. (Even today, Comcast's Policy VP
 refused to answer questions about the interference.)

 Their word is worthless. Until the interference stops, I have no
 reason to believe it will. Until either meaningful competition returns
 to broadband, or until sufficient government regulation enforces
 Network Neutrality, we have no reason to think that this agreement
 will last through the night.

 Robb Topolski</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m yelling! </p>
<p> Just by way of re-introduction if necessary, I&#8217;m probably a key figure<br />
 as to why we&#8217;re all talking about Network Neutrality again.  I was having a<br />
 problem uploading on Gnutella in early 2007.  I tracked it down to<br />
 Comcast using Sandvine-injected RST packets and documented it.  Blog<br />
 stories led to press stories which led to independent confirmation.<br />
 And here we are today.</p>
<p> Today Comcast and BitTorrent seems to have solved world hunger &#8212; and<br />
 I&#8217;d love nothing more than to be optimistic about it.  But I cannot<br />
 be.  As they say on Slashdot &#8212; show video, or it didn&#8217;t happen.  This<br />
 deal is treachery, relies on how much we can trust the word of<br />
 Comcast, and leaves the public interests out in the cold.</p>
<p> I think it&#8217;s strange that anyone believes a word that Comcast says.<br />
 This is the Comcast that:</p>
<p> 1. Told the FCC in 2005 that they would not degrade traffic in order<br />
 to convince the FCC that network neutrality regulations were not<br />
 needed.  They told the Justice Committee the same thing in 2006.</p>
<p> 2. Started degrading P2P traffic in 2006, and failed to<br />
 tell anyone what they were doing.</p>
<p> 3. Used a system that utilized forgery, and successfully placed blame<br />
 on the other peer instead of Comcast.</p>
<p> 4. Denied it when caught.</p>
<p> 5. Then changed their story when the denials were not believed, but<br />
 still never came out and said what they were doing.</p>
<p> 6. Then they justified their actions by throwing their other<br />
 Cable-Internet brothers and sisters under the bus with their &#8220;they do<br />
 it too!&#8221; defense</p>
<p> 7. Then stealthily changed the AUP days before an FCC filing where<br />
 they referred to the new provisions.</p>
<p> 8. When the changed AUP started getting press attention, they stated<br />
 that a prominent story on Comcast.net alerted millions of visitors of<br />
 the change and accused Marvin Ammori of crying wolf. (Google cache<br />
 proved that nothing alerted users to the changed AUP until the day<br />
 after the press started asking questions.)</p>
<p> 9. Then they packed the Harvard FCC hearing.</p>
<p> This company has not demonstrated that you can trust its promises, nor<br />
 can you believe its assertions. Comcast just used BitTorrent Inc. as a<br />
 tool to try and defang the FCC.</p>
<p> BitTorrent Inc. is a content provider. Vuze, who actually DID make a<br />
 complaint and petition to the FCC, is a competitor. Neither<br />
 BitTorrent, Vuze, nor Comcast represents the interests of 12 million<br />
 Comcast users nor the The Internet Society nor the public. And this<br />
 middle-of-the-night deal was made without their input.</p>
<p> Nothing has changed. The RST interference continues. It was a wrongful<br />
 act. BitTorrent Inc. has no right making a deal with Comcast allowing<br />
 it to continue to commit wrongful acts until it finally decides it is<br />
 ready to stop. The correct relief is to stop the interference<br />
 immediately and to FULLY DISCLOSE what it did and to accept<br />
 responsibility for those actions. (Even today, Comcast&#8217;s Policy VP<br />
 refused to answer questions about the interference.)</p>
<p> Their word is worthless. Until the interference stops, I have no<br />
 reason to believe it will. Until either meaningful competition returns<br />
 to broadband, or until sufficient government regulation enforces<br />
 Network Neutrality, we have no reason to think that this agreement<br />
 will last through the night.</p>
<p> Robb Topolski</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Sjobeck</title>
		<link>http://blog.hact.net/2008/03/27/comcast-hijacks-bandwidth-management/#comment-34</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Sjobeck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2008 05:18:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://huslage.wordpress.com/?p=34#comment-34</guid>
		<description>Wonder what this means?

http://www.technologyreview.com/Wire/20483/?nlid=970</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wonder what this means?</p>
<p><a href="http://www.technologyreview.com/Wire/20483/?nlid=970" rel="nofollow">http://www.technologyreview.com/Wire/20483/?nlid=970</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
