Comcast 250gb per Month Cap

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Baked

Lifer
Dec 28, 2004
36,052
17
81
125 movies? I can't even find that many porn I wanna watch a month! Besides the avg. size is 700MB to 1.4GB, not 2GB. Comcast is being overly generous. 100GB should be plenty.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
Originally posted by: Baked
125 movies? I can't even find that many porn I wanna watch a month! Besides the avg. size is 700MB to 1.4GB, not 2GB. Comcast is being overly generous. 100GB should be plenty.

The thing is..."how do you kill, that which has no life?"
 

rh71

No Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
52,844
1,049
126
Originally posted by: sjwaste
Originally posted by: rh71
I might have to do NHL Center Ice Online subscription, streaming 2.5hr hockey games almost every night of the season... I wonder how much that will use.

Not much. Let's assume a fairly generous bitrate of 1000kbps, 3 hrs a game. That is about 1.35GB per game and 41.85 GB over 31 days.

Realistically, you might not watch one game per night, esp if you're just getting it to watch one or two out of market teams, but that's just an assumption.

Also, quality sucked last year. I signed up for a trial to see, and I'd be very, very surprised if the bitrate was anywhere near 1000 kbps. Maybe they drastically upgraded this year, so I went with that assumption though.

Finally, my math could be off. I did 1000 / 8 * 60 * 60 * 3 * 31 to arrive at that #.

Thanks I'll just use nhltorrents maybe - it seems to come out the same (except that's free :D)... damn FIOS for no Center Ice yet.
 

frostedflakes

Diamond Member
Mar 1, 2005
7,925
1
81
Well if you have FiOS don't worry, no caps currently, and if they started capping, it'd probably be at something ridiculous like 1TB/mo.
 

rubix

Golden Member
Oct 16, 1999
1,302
2
0
i really don't see why people who can't imagine dling 250gb a month therefore think it is ok to cap people and claim even that is too much. it doesn't hurt you to use less you know.

do you think comcast cares about you? do you think they really are hurt by the so-called less than 1% of high bandwidth users? they are just setting up a process that will eventually lower the limits even more and probably charge you more money... or more money to get back to what you already had. maybe they can put time limits on things next, like peak hours or "normal" hours? you guys are more than happy to bend over and take it.

comcast is not hurting for bandwidth or profit. they are simply trying to not spend any more on improving their infrastructure. and they can get away with it because they have no real competition and their customers are complacent. the goal should be to reach south korea like conditions, not quasi aol-like conditions that are restrictive.

notice they said the average and moderate user uses like 2 or 3 gbs a month? why don't they just put the cap to that then? so you can all cry now that affects you too. i guess you should all just get used to being an average internet user you bandwidth crazy hog you. but pay up though. oh, but if you don't like it, have fun having nothing to turn too except a crappy fios service that will capped soon too. more please.

comcast is probably lying about their figures and lying about how it affects them too. what do you expect them to say?

things are fine as they are, but isps want to create a sense that they are not so after a long enough time everyone will believe it and accept it. and it's happening right now.

you can go over 250gb a month just by downloading newsgroup headers. not even a single binary file... just the text headers.
 

frostedflakes

Diamond Member
Mar 1, 2005
7,925
1
81
Originally posted by: rubix
i really don't see why people who can't imagine dling 250gb a month therefore think it is ok to cap people and claim even that is too much. it doesn't hurt you to use less you know.

do you think comcast cares about you? do you think they really are hurt by the so-called less than 1% of high bandwidth users? they are just setting up a process that will eventually lower the limits even more and probably charge you more money... or more money to get back to what you already had. maybe they can put time limits on things next, like peak hours or "normal" hours? you guys are more than happy to bend over and take it.

comcast is not hurting for bandwidth or profit. they are simply trying to not spend any more on improving their infrastructure. and they can get away with it because they have no real competition and their customers are complacent. the goal should be to reach south korea like conditions, not quasi aol-like conditions that are restrictive.

notice they said the average and moderate user uses like 2 or 3 gbs a month? why don't they just put the cap to that then? so you can all cry now that affects you too. i guess you should all just get used to being an average internet user you bandwidth you crazy hog. but pay up though. oh, but if you don't like it, have fun having nothing to turn too except a crappy fios service that will capped soon too. more please.

comcast is probably lying about their figures and lying about how it affects them too. what do you expect them to say?

things are fine as they are, but isps want to create a sense that they are not so after a long enough time everyone will believe it and accept it. and it's happening right now.

you can go over 250gb a month just by downloading newsgroup headers. not even a binary single file... just the text headers.
Oh wow, lol...
 

nismotigerwvu

Golden Member
May 13, 2004
1,568
33
91
Originally posted by: weadjust
Directv video on demand is downloaded from your internet provider. How many hours of HD programing would it take to max out 250 GB limit?

8~12 GB per movie

so 25~ish movies alone will crush the cap.
More anti competitive moves by comcast.
4 HD movies a week and you are already more than halfway to the cap. This number isn;t too crazy either. One "Movie" (or several TV shows) through the week and one per night Friday through Saturday.
Add this on top of some online gaming, a few Steam purchases a month and normal activities and you are one of those evil "hogs".
I swear I had a post in this thread disappear.....only galvanizing my opinions further.
 

mugs

Lifer
Apr 29, 2003
48,920
46
91
Originally posted by: rubix
i really don't see why people who can't imagine dling 250gb a month therefore think it is ok to cap people and claim even that is too much. it doesn't hurt you to use less you know.

do you think comcast cares about you? do you think they really are hurt by the so-called less than 1% of high bandwidth users? they are just setting up a process that will eventually lower the limits even more and probably charge you more money... or more money to get back to what you already had. maybe they can put time limits on things next, like peak hours or "normal" hours? you guys are more than happy to bend over and take it.

comcast is not hurting for bandwidth or profit. they are simply trying to not spend any more on improving their infrastructure. and they can get away with it because they have no real competition and their customers are complacent. the goal should be to reach south korea like conditions, not quasi aol-like conditions that are restrictive.

notice they said the average and moderate user uses like 2 or 3 gbs a month? why don't they just put the cap to that then? so you can all cry now that affects you too. i guess you should all just get used to being an average internet user you bandwidth crazy hog you. but pay up though. oh, but if you don't like it, have fun having nothing to turn too except a crappy fios service that will capped soon too. more please.

comcast is probably lying about their figures and lying about how it affects them too. what do you expect them to say?

things are fine as they are, but isps want to create a sense that they are not so after a long enough time everyone will believe it and accept it. and it's happening right now.

you can go over 250gb a month just by downloading newsgroup headers. not even a single binary file... just the text headers.

So you're what, about 14 years old? CRAAAAAAAAAAWLING IN MY SKIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIN
 

musicman64

Senior member
Jun 29, 2003
339
0
0
I just moved into a new apt complex (as in just built), but I can't get Comcast or DSL yet. So at the moment, I'm stuck with a local cable provider with a 25g a month cap..... I *wish* I could have the 250g cap - can't believe I'm even saying that in this day and age, wow....
 

mrSHEiK124

Lifer
Mar 6, 2004
11,488
2
0
Originally posted by: musicman64
I just moved into a new apt complex (as in just built), but I can't get Comcast or DSL yet. So at the moment, I'm stuck with a local cable provider with a 25g a month cap..... I *wish* I could have the 250g cap - can't believe I'm even saying that in this day and age, wow....

I've got no internet at my current apartment and I'm moving too soon to make getting internet here worthwhile, so I tether my cell phone to my laptop. When I'm not downloading pr0n, it'd be hard to surpass ~500 MB a day, and that's with two computers uploading/downloading stuff for F@H back and forth and Skype logged in. Add pr0n and it hits maybe 1 GB. Throw in a few HD movies downloaded, and you've got 50 GB of usage a month.

AT&T still hasn't said anything, and not only do I not have a tethering plan, I don't even have the fucking PDA plan I'm supposed to. That's right, I'm on their WAP "MediaNET" plan with a smartphone. Win :p
 

frostedflakes

Diamond Member
Mar 1, 2005
7,925
1
81
Comcast released info on their new network management techniques. Sounds pretty good to me. :thumbsup:

Comcast has finally provided the FCC with details of its new congestion management system, and there's a lot to like. Deep packet inspection it out. P2P protocol targeting is out. Management systems that affect entire regions are out.

Instead, Comcast will deploy a highly-targeted, protocol-agnostic management system that has nothing to do with the applications a customer uses and everything to do with the total bandwidth being used in the last few minutes. It's a huge step forward from the previous system that relied on falsified TCP reset packets to interrupt P2P uploads. The company plans on rolling it out later this year despite its lawsuit against the FCC over the ruling that forced this new approach.

When the FCC issued its Order against the company's P2P throttling scheme last month, Comcast was given 30 days to describe its current congestion management and the changes that the company would make to comply with the FCC ruling. Those 30 days are up today, and Comcast has just filed its document with the agency. Ars also spoke to the company to flesh out our understanding of the new system. Here's how it works.
A better congestion management system

Comcast's new technique is based on a simple premise: during periods of congestion, heavy users of bandwidth on a local node ought to see speed reductions before light users. To make that happen, the system tracks each customer's uploads and downloads separately using software from Sandvine that runs on Linux servers (Comcast stresses to us that this is not deep packet inspection software, but basic "shallow inspection" code that simply counts packets.)

"Our management system is designed so that the effect on all customers is as minimal as possible, even those whose traffic is being managed," Comcast spokesperson Sena Fitzmaurice told Ars. "We want to make sure that all of our users are getting a fair share of resources during times of congestion."

When any port (think neighborhood node) on the Cable Modem Termination System (CMTS) in the local cable company office enters a "near congestion" state, the system looks up the heaviest users of bandwidth during the preceding few minutes. Those users then have their traffic tagged as "Best Effort" rather than the default "Priority Best Effort." At this point, nothing happens to anyone's traffic.

When congestion actually occurs, the Priority Best Effort users should see no slowdown in their connections; all traffic will go through ahead of the Best Effort traffic. Best Effort folks may not notice any slowdown, either. They are not speed-limited, but they do go to the back of the quality of service (QoS) line. At this point, if traffic does in fact fill the pipe, users in the Best Effort category will experience delays in their connections, though their traffic will still be sent on whenever possible.

A CMTS has separate upload and download ports, and the new management system is port-specific. If congestion only appears on the upload link, no one's download links will be affected. In addition, when the system begins to tag users as Best Effort, it only considers their traffic on the specific port being managed; heavy downloaders won't be tagged if it is only the upload link that starts to have problems.

Fitzmaurice told Ars that the traffic reprioritzation would typically affect only a handful of customers when it goes into effect. "On a typical day, less than one percent of people had their traffic put in the Best Efforts category," she said. "It's measured in 15-minute increments and is only in effect for as long as your traffic level was over a specific threshold."

The new system also applies management only to the nodes actually experiencing congestion, which means that neighborhoods, rather than entire cities, would be affected. If your friend across town is in a neighborhood filled with crazed P2P uploaders, her network segment may experience management even while yours remains completely unaffected.

The moment that congestion vanishes, all traffic flows without delay even though some users are still tagged with "Best Effort" (the system monitors congestion and responds nearly in realtime). The tag will only be applied for a few minutes at a time and has nothing do with the company's new 250GB monthly data limit, which remains in effect.

Comcast has trialled the new approach in five cities: Chambersburg, PA, ?Colorado Springs, CO, East Orange, FL, Lake City, FL, and Warrenton, VA. In the course of its testing, Comcast has paid special attention to the way that the system will affect realtime protocols like VoIP and gaming. Somewhat incredibly, it claims to have received zero complaints about the new approach from any household in the five markets. "We have had no consumer complaints that can be traced to the new practices in the pilot areas," Fitzmaurice told Ars. "It's compatible with Internet standards and supportive of Internet innovation."

What the FCC will think of the new system remains to be seen.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ar...tic-on-throttling.html
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
36
91
Originally posted by: nismotigerwvu
Originally posted by: weadjust
Directv video on demand is downloaded from your internet provider. How many hours of HD programing would it take to max out 250 GB limit?

8~12 GB per movie

so 25~ish movies alone will crush the cap.
More anti competitive moves by comcast.
4 HD movies a week and you are already more than halfway to the cap. This number isn;t too crazy either. One "Movie" (or several TV shows) through the week and one per night Friday through Saturday.
Add this on top of some online gaming, a few Steam purchases a month and normal activities and you are one of those evil "hogs".
I swear I had a post in this thread disappear.....only galvanizing my opinions further.


Again, its less than 1% of people who this will apply to. It isnt as easy as you make it sound, otherwise it would be a larger percentage. Get over it.
 

SampSon

Diamond Member
Jan 3, 2006
7,160
1
0
Originally posted by: rubix
blah blah blah

you can go over 250gb a month just by downloading newsgroup headers. not even a single binary file... just the text headers.
Show me some sort of realistic data that backs the notion that newsgroups are used for anything significantly more substantial than pirating (oops, supposed to keep that quiet, right?).

As for the rest of your mindless diatribe, do you know that profit is the primary driving force behind a companies existance? I suppose it would be hard to understand that with your incredibly unimpressive grasp of the englishes words and stuffs omg lol pr0n!!1!!.

 

JujuFish

Lifer
Feb 3, 2005
11,111
814
136
Originally posted by: rubix
i really don't see why people who can't imagine dling 250gb a month therefore think it is ok to cap people and claim even that is too much. it doesn't hurt you to use less you know.

do you think comcast cares about you? do you think they really are hurt by the so-called less than 1% of high bandwidth users? they are just setting up a process that will eventually lower the limits even more and probably charge you more money... or more money to get back to what you already had. maybe they can put time limits on things next, like peak hours or "normal" hours? you guys are more than happy to bend over and take it.

comcast is not hurting for bandwidth or profit. they are simply trying to not spend any more on improving their infrastructure. and they can get away with it because they have no real competition and their customers are complacent. the goal should be to reach south korea like conditions, not quasi aol-like conditions that are restrictive.

notice they said the average and moderate user uses like 2 or 3 gbs a month? why don't they just put the cap to that then? so you can all cry now that affects you too. i guess you should all just get used to being an average internet user you bandwidth crazy hog you. but pay up though. oh, but if you don't like it, have fun having nothing to turn too except a crappy fios service that will capped soon too. more please.

comcast is probably lying about their figures and lying about how it affects them too. what do you expect them to say?

things are fine as they are, but isps want to create a sense that they are not so after a long enough time everyone will believe it and accept it. and it's happening right now.

you can go over 250gb a month just by downloading newsgroup headers. not even a single binary file... just the text headers.

I can't wait to see spidey's reaction to this. :laugh:
 

God Mode

Platinum Member
Jul 2, 2005
2,903
0
71
I find it hard to believe that the average consumer uses only 2-3gb a month. I can browse some popular websites for 30 mins. and they alone leave a few hundred megs of crap in my cache.
 

EKKC

Diamond Member
May 31, 2005
5,895
0
0
i cant wait to see what comcast will do to actual victims of bandwidth theft reporting that their open wireless has been tapped in by a rogue neighbor
or fake victims who reports that their bandwidth has been "stolen" due to a wireless network hack.
 

DefDC

Golden Member
Aug 28, 2003
1,858
1
81
Originally posted by: frostedflakes
Comcast released info on their new network management techniques. Sounds pretty good to me. :thumbsup:

Comcast has finally provided the FCC with details of its new congestion management system, and there's a lot to like. Deep packet inspection it out. P2P protocol targeting is out. Management systems that affect entire regions are out.

Instead, Comcast will deploy a highly-targeted, protocol-agnostic management system that has nothing to do with the applications a customer uses and everything to do with the total bandwidth being used in the last few minutes. It's a huge step forward from the previous system that relied on falsified TCP reset packets to interrupt P2P uploads. The company plans on rolling it out later this year despite its lawsuit against the FCC over the ruling that forced this new approach.

When the FCC issued its Order against the company's P2P throttling scheme last month, Comcast was given 30 days to describe its current congestion management and the changes that the company would make to comply with the FCC ruling. Those 30 days are up today, and Comcast has just filed its document with the agency. Ars also spoke to the company to flesh out our understanding of the new system. Here's how it works.
A better congestion management system

Comcast's new technique is based on a simple premise: during periods of congestion, heavy users of bandwidth on a local node ought to see speed reductions before light users. To make that happen, the system tracks each customer's uploads and downloads separately using software from Sandvine that runs on Linux servers (Comcast stresses to us that this is not deep packet inspection software, but basic "shallow inspection" code that simply counts packets.)

"Our management system is designed so that the effect on all customers is as minimal as possible, even those whose traffic is being managed," Comcast spokesperson Sena Fitzmaurice told Ars. "We want to make sure that all of our users are getting a fair share of resources during times of congestion."

When any port (think neighborhood node) on the Cable Modem Termination System (CMTS) in the local cable company office enters a "near congestion" state, the system looks up the heaviest users of bandwidth during the preceding few minutes. Those users then have their traffic tagged as "Best Effort" rather than the default "Priority Best Effort." At this point, nothing happens to anyone's traffic.

When congestion actually occurs, the Priority Best Effort users should see no slowdown in their connections; all traffic will go through ahead of the Best Effort traffic. Best Effort folks may not notice any slowdown, either. They are not speed-limited, but they do go to the back of the quality of service (QoS) line. At this point, if traffic does in fact fill the pipe, users in the Best Effort category will experience delays in their connections, though their traffic will still be sent on whenever possible.

A CMTS has separate upload and download ports, and the new management system is port-specific. If congestion only appears on the upload link, no one's download links will be affected. In addition, when the system begins to tag users as Best Effort, it only considers their traffic on the specific port being managed; heavy downloaders won't be tagged if it is only the upload link that starts to have problems.

Fitzmaurice told Ars that the traffic reprioritzation would typically affect only a handful of customers when it goes into effect. "On a typical day, less than one percent of people had their traffic put in the Best Efforts category," she said. "It's measured in 15-minute increments and is only in effect for as long as your traffic level was over a specific threshold."

The new system also applies management only to the nodes actually experiencing congestion, which means that neighborhoods, rather than entire cities, would be affected. If your friend across town is in a neighborhood filled with crazed P2P uploaders, her network segment may experience management even while yours remains completely unaffected.

The moment that congestion vanishes, all traffic flows without delay even though some users are still tagged with "Best Effort" (the system monitors congestion and responds nearly in realtime). The tag will only be applied for a few minutes at a time and has nothing do with the company's new 250GB monthly data limit, which remains in effect.

Comcast has trialled the new approach in five cities: Chambersburg, PA, ?Colorado Springs, CO, East Orange, FL, Lake City, FL, and Warrenton, VA. In the course of its testing, Comcast has paid special attention to the way that the system will affect realtime protocols like VoIP and gaming. Somewhat incredibly, it claims to have received zero complaints about the new approach from any household in the five markets. "We have had no consumer complaints that can be traced to the new practices in the pilot areas," Fitzmaurice told Ars. "It's compatible with Internet standards and supportive of Internet innovation."

What the FCC will think of the new system remains to be seen.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ar...tic-on-throttling.html


I have no problems with this. I also have no problems with Comcast kicking out insanely high bandwidth users. If it was 250gb/day, then, yes, they are up to no good. :thumbsdown:

I also understand that I'm not their preferred type of customer. Who wouldn't want customers who pay for a premium service who barely use it?
 

nismotigerwvu

Golden Member
May 13, 2004
1,568
33
91
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Originally posted by: nismotigerwvu
Originally posted by: weadjust
Directv video on demand is downloaded from your internet provider. How many hours of HD programing would it take to max out 250 GB limit?

8~12 GB per movie

so 25~ish movies alone will crush the cap.
More anti competitive moves by comcast.
4 HD movies a week and you are already more than halfway to the cap. This number isn;t too crazy either. One "Movie" (or several TV shows) through the week and one per night Friday through Saturday.
Add this on top of some online gaming, a few Steam purchases a month and normal activities and you are one of those evil "hogs".
I swear I had a post in this thread disappear.....only galvanizing my opinions further.


Again, its less than 1% of people who this will apply to. It isnt as easy as you make it sound, otherwise it would be a larger percentage. Get over it.

8 hours of TV in a week (through an on demand service) isn't very hard you know. The reason it isn't wide spread yet is becuase they have only recently started offering it. Also, most people with a dish tend not to have their internet through a cable provider, as horrible service and policies such as these are exactly what drove them away from cable tv in the first place.
 

eelw

Diamond Member
Dec 4, 1999
9,775
4,969
136
I'm at 250GB and only halfway through my billing period :) Luckily I have an old Bell Sympatico account that grandfathered unlimited bandwidth. Don't have to worry about the 60GB cap on new accounts.
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
Originally posted by: DefDC
Originally posted by: dighn
250 GB is very generous. One of the largest ISPs in Canada just LOWERED their cap from 60GB to 25GB. Not my ISP but it's a bad precedent. :|

Generous for YOU.

We signed, what we thought, was an unlimited plan. I do a lot of downloading. I always have. It hasn't been an issue. I HAVE PAID EXTRA do so at top speed.

I feel so much sympathy for you. :roll:
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
Originally posted by: DefDC
I don't Torrent or fileshare. But I do have a Giganews subscription that I enjoy.

I have to laugh at this! :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Let's paraphrase those sentences:
"I don't pirate illegal content through torrents or filesharing. But I do pirate illegal content through newsgroups, which somehow makes it okay."
 

DefDC

Golden Member
Aug 28, 2003
1,858
1
81
Originally posted by: cubby1223
Originally posted by: DefDC
I don't Torrent or fileshare. But I do have a Giganews subscription that I enjoy.

I have to laugh at this! :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Let's paraphrase those sentences:
"I don't pirate illegal content through torrents or filesharing. But I do pirate illegal content through newsgroups, which somehow makes it okay."

Laugh all you want. There's a huge BANDWIDTH difference between torrents and Usenet. That's what this conversation is about... Thanks for playing though...
 

DefDC

Golden Member
Aug 28, 2003
1,858
1
81
Originally posted by: cubby1223
Originally posted by: DefDC
Originally posted by: dighn
250 GB is very generous. One of the largest ISPs in Canada just LOWERED their cap from 60GB to 25GB. Not my ISP but it's a bad precedent. :|

Generous for YOU.

We signed, what we thought, was an unlimited plan. I do a lot of downloading. I always have. It hasn't been an issue. I HAVE PAID EXTRA do so at top speed.

I feel so much sympathy for you. :roll:

Thanks for your input. :roll: