Comcast Denying Bittorrent Traffic

AP has (apparently) confirmed that Comcast is blocking Bittorrent regularly. A back-of-my-envelope thought on this matter is that they are saving bandwidth to sell to other people, so it’s part of their business model to manage the network traffic through their backbones. Seems that this will have continuing impacts on their customers and the ongoing debate over network neutrality.

Which brings me to a thought I’ve had in times past. I’ll preface this thought with the statement that I’m a network moron. I have some vague notion of how packets bounce around the world via copper and fiber and other transmission streams, but no firm knowledge. That being stated, I think that there is a market for newly built residential subdivisions to have super-high-speed internet built in to the homes. If a large subdivision were to have its own fiber drop, and optical connections into every house, that would be a selling point for a lot of people, especially here in Atlanta. I would certainly be willing to entertain a large up-front cost that was rolled into my mortgage. Maintenance could be part of a homeowners agreement. Then we wouldn’t be dealing with the crappy customer service that Comcast or AT&T deals out to their little customers. We’d be a major commerical customer who would require better upkeep.

It’s a thought. I wonder if this is happening anywhere?

This entry was posted in News, Opinion. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Comcast Denying Bittorrent Traffic

  1. Jeff says:

    I know it’s happening in at least one place… although you might be surprised… my brother was working on a Senior Housing complex in PA and they had their own fibre network and managed all of their own wired and wireless.

    Heck, and Christian gated communities can filter whatever they want!

  2. Ken says:

    I’ve seen Cat-5 ethernet run in housing communities in Manassas, VA, and in Ashburn, VA. I haven’t heard too much about the Manassas project since I first read about it. I know all too well how the Ashburn project panned out (according to the Washington Post).

    According to the WP, the construction costs of laying ethernet and pre-wired houses was financed by both the builder and agreeing to a fixed ISP. The ISP agreed, cabled were laid, and the HOA was entered into an agreement for internet costs. Everybody was happy, since their internet connection was better that dialup, DSL, or 1-3Mb/s cable.

    Fast-forward a few years, and internet costs have dropped. Verizon has moved in with 10-30Mb/s fiber for the same price or less as existing ISPs, but the HOA is tied into an agreement with their ISP. I suppose they could break the agreement, but then they’d probably be liable for construction costs?

    I’m not sure what I would have done if I lived there? Disconnect my ethernet from the HOA, allow Verizon FiOS to tie into my local drop, but continue paying HOA fees for an ISP I don’t use??

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>