cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Ellacoya say Usenet is not a bandwidth hog!

N/A

Ellacoya say Usenet is not a bandwidth hog!

I'm a usenet user rather than P2P, so my point of view is somewhat biased, but I would like to know why Plus have decided to impose such a low cap on Usenet traffic, when it accounts for such a small percentage of their total network traffic.

I found an interesting document on the Ellacoya web site (for those that don't know, Ellacoya provide the traffic shaping kit that Plus are using to restrict our bandwidth). The document summarises the bandwidth and application usage in Europe between 25/08/05 and 02/09/05:

The top most active 5% of subscribers respresented approx 56% of the total bandwidth, while the top 20% of active subscribers consume more than 97% of the total bandwidth - no real surprises there I guess.

What caught my attention was the bandwidth distribution by application :

P2P accounted for 65.5% of the traffic.
HTTP accounted for 27.5% of the traffic
Usenet accounted for 2.3% (thats two point three percent) of the traffic
The remaining 4.7% comprised of streaming A/V, VoIP, gaming, IM, email and FTP each consuming thess than 1% of the bandwidth.

The document goes on to analyse the most popular applications:

HTTP provided daily peaks of 50% of subscribers (most popular app)
IM produced peaks of 25% of subscribers
P2P peaked at 18% of subscribers
Email peaked at 12%
Everything else (including Usenet) produced peaks of less than 10%.

So, come on Plus, why have you felt the need to restrict Usenet users to a paltry 15Gb / moth when we account for so little of your bandwidth usage?

Q.
33 REPLIES
N/A

Ellacoya say Usenet is not a bandwidth hog!

Because usenet is becoming the new p2p for illegal downloads as record/movie companies are slowly getting p2p networks closed down or rendered void of uploaders.
.. is my guess.
N/A

Ellacoya say Usenet is not a bandwidth hog!

Usenet has always been 1 of the choices for hardcore downloaders, even before p2p existed...
JonathanW
Grafter
Posts: 2,648
Registered: 02-10-2007

Ellacoya say Usenet is not a bandwidth hog!

Hi,

As has been said in this lengthy thread on usenet the 15gb usage level comes from the fact that the majority of our customers who do use usenet use less than 15gb of usenet traffic a month. Thus the level was set, so that people who only use the service a little get better speeds at all time, and the few people who do use more than this get faster speeds for the first portion of their downloads.
N/A

Ellacoya say Usenet is not a bandwidth hog!

so why penalise the rest of us who do use more than 15Gb, when your own equipment providers prove what little impact we have overall? And don't try to tell me we're straining your usenet server, I imagine most "serious" usenet people subscribe to dedicated service providers.

Q.
prichardson
Grafter
Posts: 1,503
Registered: 05-04-2007

Ellacoya say Usenet is not a bandwidth hog!

Hi,

The changes made to USENET are not about the network volumes they cause. As you point out, they don't account for a great deal, but this is European wide, which is rather broad, and doesn't cater for the tastes of the UK.

The USENET changes are about what the customer wanted. Customers wanted faster speeds, and unfortunatly, to make it happen, compromisses have to be made.

Kind Regards,
JonathanW
Grafter
Posts: 2,648
Registered: 02-10-2007

Ellacoya say Usenet is not a bandwidth hog!

Firstly, the changes to usenet came after customer feedback about usenet speeds in genereal being on the slow side, which is why the new two tiered system was introduced. There were a number of possible solutions considered by the networks team, but the one currently in place was the best compromise.

As for the figures published by Ellacoya, these are for the whole of Europe, which is a large place, and not everyone in Europe uses usenet, where as more people do use P2P. So those figures will be different from ISP to ISP, and basing an assumption in the UK on figures for Europe isn't going to give a firm base for discussion.
N/A

Ellacoya say Usenet is not a bandwidth hog!

Can we see your figures then, or is that for pn use only!?

[Moderator's note by Mark (pcsni): Full quote of preceding post removed as it is unnecessary and against the rules]
prichardson
Grafter
Posts: 1,503
Registered: 05-04-2007

Ellacoya say Usenet is not a bandwidth hog!

Hi,

Unfortunatly not. Such data relates to customers service usage, and as such is protected under DPA.

Once digested outside of the DPA, it comes down to the figure of only a handful of customers using above 15GB of usenet data each month.

Kind Regards,
N/A

Ellacoya say Usenet is not a bandwidth hog!

Ah shucks!

I was thinking of a chart that showed total data transfered up the side along with apps down the bottom (eg, http/ed2k/bt/nttp/mail/ftp)

I am supprised that this comes under the dpa because really the only thing you can see it total data shifted and not individual user info.
N/A

Ellacoya say Usenet is not a bandwidth hog!

Quote
Unfortunatly not. Such data relates to customers service usage, and as such is protected under DPA.,


It never ceases to amaze me how often the Data Protection Act is used to avoid divulging information.

This is only true when it is unauthorised disclosure of personal information which can be associated with a data subject. i.e. a user.

The information we're talking about here doesn't identify individual users.

It strikes me there is an anomoly here: if only a handful of users are above the 15GB figure then why aren't they the only ones being affected by this policy? The number of posts on the subject here suggest that this is a very large "handful".

I agree, a simple graph showing the available bandwidth on the Y axis and then the different types of traffic as stacked bars over time would go a long way to explaining why the policy was introduced. Also if you collect stats on dropped packets that might also be useful to see on the same timeline.
N/A

Ellacoya say Usenet is not a bandwidth hog!

Quote
Hi,

Unfortunatly not. Such data relates to customers service usage, and as such is protected under DPA.

Once digested outside of the DPA, it comes down to the figure of only a handful of customers using above 15GB of usenet data each month.

Kind Regards,



So, you dismiss the Ellacoya data as being irrelevant to the UK (I can't believe British usage patterns are that much different to the rest of the EU) but then refuse to provide your own stats, citing the Data Protection Act? Words fail me.
N/A

Ellacoya say Usenet is not a bandwidth hog!

DPA....

Quote
The Data Protection Act 1998 covers private and public sector organisations in the UK.

This legislation gives an individual the right to find out what information is held about him or her electronically and in structured records. From the 1st January 2005, the Freedom of Information Act amends the Data Protection Act 1998 so that any information, including unstructured records, held by them about an individual can be accessed by that individual.

If any of the information held about an individual is incorrect, the individual has the right to correct this (and have the inaccurate information removed / destroyed). There are some exemptions to the right of subject access.

The Data Protection Act 1998 also regulates the use of computerised information and other records in relation to living individuals, and regulates disclosure.

The Information Commissioner, Richard Thomas, administers and enforces the Data Protection Act 1998.


Its a damn shame you cannot apply the freedom of infomation act on this otherwise i would demand to see this info.
N/A

Ellacoya say Usenet is not a bandwidth hog!

PN are simply using the new hardware like one would use a sledgehammer to crack a nut. It's a case of 'oh look what this shiny bit of new kit can do - shall we just let rip, and see what happens?'

There did not appear to be any trials of this hardware, and if there were this whole sorry mess could have been avoided.

Remember when they first turned it on? They reduced Usenet speeds to 5kb/s for a few days, then realised that this was unworkable (due to complaints) and upped it to 30kb/s. This, in MHO, demonstrates that they have not thought the implementation through, and are simply pushing butons to see what happens. At least they listened to thei first bout of user complaints, which shows some compassion.

I believe that only the real abusers of the 100GB limit should have their traffic shaped in this way, not a generic blanket ban as is now.

Without their (PN) verifying the data usage/throughput across protocols, how can we trust anything they say?

I guess PN are frightened by what the results would show. I really doubt we are so different from the rest of Europe. After all other parts of Europe have even faster connections than the UK.
Alecto
Grafter
Posts: 2,886
Registered: 30-07-2007

Ellacoya say Usenet is not a bandwidth hog!

Quote


I guess PN are frightened by what the results would show. I really doubt we are so different from the rest of Europe. After all other parts of Europe have even faster connections than the UK.


Sounds about right.

But Data Protection ActHuhHuh Why do people come out with such nonsense?

Sorry Plusnet, I can't pay my subscription this month because the Data Protection Act forbids me being identified. What a load of tosh.