Add to Chrome
Exetel, the Australian ISP, has decided to begin a program of “de-prioritizing” P2P traffic and restrict the amount of bandwidth allocated to such users by 50%. Taking an aggregate of all the bandwidth users of file-sharing software could theoretically use from noon to midnight each day, Exetel then intends to restrict this amount and reduce it by half.
Due to begin in mid-November, Exetel makes the laughable surmise that they are really doing no harm to anyone and merely “protecting” the “…current low prices and high download allowances for all users.” Heaven forbid if you actually use all of the bandwidth you are paying for in the first place.
Exetel goes on to further poke customers in the eye by noting that “You will still be able to get your copy of “Debbie Does Taronga Zoo’s Major Wildlife IV”; it will just take twice as long to download.” So let me get this straight, I pay X amount of dollars for an internet connection only to discover that my bandwidth is automatically cut in half when I need it most? Also, what P2P protocols will be throttled? They don’t say in the forum message to their customers but, surely they can’t throttle them all.
So why now, why this sudden move by Exetel? They write:
Over the past two years Exetel has analysed the traffic that it carries to and from its users – as any network provider would do.
Over that, relatively short, period we have noticed that the percentage of P2P traffic carried on our network has significantly increased as a percentage of total traffic – something that every other network provider around the world has also noticed.
This is where they go on to make the assertion that “normal” people who download stuff won’t care how long it takes only that it eventually downloads at all. This is the really funny part:
We have decided to begin a program of “de-prioritizing” P2P traffic on the basis that it should be immaterial to an end user whether their downloaded files arrive in 5 minutes or ten minutes – when all is said and done they are files that will be used at some later period and whether, or not, they are available a few minutes later is of absolutely NO consequence.
“Immaterial to an end user?” What are they crazy? My guess is that they’ve never tried to download a 700MB XVID movie file before, because it’s more time than just a matter of 5 or 10 minutes involved.
My only hope is that ISPs here in the United States won’t follow suit. My guess is that they won’t because we have too many options when it comes to selecting an ISP that they would only risking losing customers to a competitor. Either way, time will tell I guess. In the meantime Exetel customers are none too happy, with one guy noting ” For cutting p2p speed, they should be bloody reducing their costs, let alone “retaining” them.”
THE COMPLETE FORUM POST FROM EXETEL
We’ve raised this issue before.
Over the past two years Exetel has analysed the traffic that it carries to and from its users – as any network provider would do.
Over that, relatively short, period we have noticed that the percentage of P2P traffic carried on our network has significantly increased as a percentage of total traffic – something that every other network provider around the world has also noticed.
We have decided to begin a program of “de-prioritizing” P2P traffic on the basis that it should be immaterial to an end user whether their downloaded files arrive in 5 minutes or ten minutes – when all is said and done they are files that will be used at some later period and whether, or not, they are available a few minutes later is of absolutely NO consequence.
As any Exetel user would have noticed, Exetel has progressively lengthened the ‘uncounted period’ and has also increased the ‘soft’ download limit that applies to that period; currently 30 gb.
From mid November, approximately, Exetel will restrict the amount of bandwidth it provides to P2P traffic to approximately 50% of what all aggregated users of P2P protocols could, theoretically, use during the period 12 noon to 12 midnight each day.
This will have the, theoretical, effect, of reducing P2P download speeds by 50% – it obviously won’t affect the total of downloads.
These restrictions shouldn’t affect any user at all – other than to slow the download speed of files using P2P protocols – which shouldn’t matter in any way.
You will still be able to get your copy of “Debbie Does Taronga Zoo’s Major Wildlife IV”; it will just take twice as long to download.
Why are we doing this?
We are doing this because it will allow Exetel to retain the current low prices and high download allowances for all users.
Who will be inconvenienced?
No-one.
What will it cost Exetel to do this?
A cash outlay of over $100,000 which will reduce operating costs by around $60,000 a month.
Everyone benefits. No-one loses.
I've been interested in P2P since the early, high-flying days of Napster and KaZaA. I believe that analog copyright laws are ill-suited to the digital age, and that art and culture shouldn't be subject to the whims of international entertainment industry conglomerates. Twitter | Google Plus
