They stated that they stick by the reasoning that their traffic management hardware/software can sometimes falsely identify traffic from sources as being P2P traffic even though it isn’t. This can result in some traffic being throttled even when it shouldn’t be. Specifically:

As the Company has consistently stated, it does not intentionally shape any non-P2P file-sharing traffic as part of its network management practices and, as such, there are no websites that the Company “targets” for traffic shaping.  However, as the Company has stated in the past, the deployment of any network technology such as technical ITMPs may have some unintended consequences and the Company encourages its customers to bring such unintended consequences to its attention in order to resolve them.

BUT, they’ve done extensive testing with some of the specific sites I mentioned to them and were able to replicate the issue. Specifically hotfile.com, using both free and premium accounts.

As a result of the complaint letter, the Company has performed various tests in an attempt to recreate the reported problem. As accurately indicated in the complaint letter, www.hotfile.com is a storage type of site that leverages http (web) direct downloading mechanisms for the sharing of files. The site offers two types of access, a free access and a premium (paid for subscription) access. Whereas the free access has limitations in terms of the number of concurrent downloads as well as throughput/speed that can be reduced if the site www.hotfile.com is congested, the premium service is not limited in concurrent downloads or throughput/speed as a result of congestion at the site itself.

So they admit something is messed up for ‘some’ of the traffic. But the interesting part is they’ve claimed to already be rolling out a solution I’m wondering if this is the result of many complaints, or specifically this one, but still interesting. In the following quote, DPI is Deep Packet Inspection devices. And to give context, my original complaint was sent to them on the 19th of October, so it definitely gave them time to react to it.

In order to address the issue of inadvertent shaping of www.hotfile.com traffic, there was a requirement to update the signatures used in the various DPI platforms used by the Company. A solution was implemented for the vast majority of the Company’s DPI devices on 2 November 2010 and a second solution for the remaining DPI devices will be implemented by 30 November 2010. As such, www.hotfile.com traffic should no longer be shaped during peak hours after the 30 November 2010.

So it looks like ISPs don’t want to mess with whatever the CRTC deems they should be doing, once it’s been established. The issue is the CRTC giving in so much to ISPs when they lobby for change. UGH.

Also DPI devices freak me out. EVERY packet that leaves from your computer to go to anywhere else, encrypted or not, is inspected by these machines. They look at the actual CONTENTS of the packets to determine what type of traffic they are. It’s like having a packet sniffer constantly monitoring your connection -.-

So what else does the CRTC have planned for our internet? Why, more control for the ISPs and government of course and screwing us over! YAY……..

Currently we’ve got this wonderful issue with FURTHER tracking of what you do on the internet. And just for kicks, lets give the ISPs even MORE control over how much they can limit our bandwidth. Unlimited internet? NOPE. Rogers already doesn’t allow this, and bell charges an extra $30/month for unlimited bandwidth on their current packages. Think of our cell phone plans. $30/month for a measly 1 or 2gb or whatever the hell it is that they offer. And then charging a RIDICULOUS amount of money per additional MEGABYTE. Now imagine that happening to your internet connection on the desktop too. Hell you’re probably already in that position. Imagine it being worse. Ugh…

*edit*
Thought it might be useful to include my original complaint sent to the CRTC as well. If nothing else, could serve as a template for throttling for other sites and such. If they’re gonna throttle P2P traffic then they damned well stick to nothing but that only.

If you want to try and get throttling changed at all…then complain to the CRTC, your local government officials, whatever. Hell, complain to every government official you can get the contact info for even

This complaint is in regard to Bell Internet Services and their Internet Traffic Management Practices.

In January and February 2010, the CRTC followed up with several Canadian ISPs in order to ensure consumers have access to the information they need to make informed choices about the Internet services they purchase. Specifically, the Commission required that several ISPs more prominently display information about their ITMPs on their websites, marketing materials, and terms of service.

This is currently NOT the case with Bell’s Internet Services! Bell has decided to throttle (i.e. lower the bandwidth) on websites beyond only P2P (peer to peer) traffic as stated on their “Network Management” web page http://internet.bell.ca/index.cfm?language=en&method=content.view&content_id=12119

An example of these websites includes HOTFILE.COM.

This is a well known issue amongst it’s customers, but such practices are not at all mentioned on any of their websites, marketing materials, terms of service or acceptable use policies.

Their terms of service http://internet.bell.ca/index.cfm?method=content.view&category_id=550&content_id=11013 has several locations in which they mention the quality and speed of service one should expect:

1) Section 6: “Service” in this case refers to the internet service I have chosen from their available plans. There is no mention of the service being affected by using a particular website here.

2) Section 12: Here, they explain how they are not responsible for bottlenecks somewhere along the connection between my local system and a remote system. However this is a well known issue that affects all its customers, and ONLY their customers. Customers on competing ISPs (such as Rogers) have no such issues with the mentioned website. Also, the speeds obtained and the times for which the speeds are at a lower rate correspond to their P2P traffic management practices.

Further down the Terms of Service page is their Acceptable Use Policy. There is one section in particular which seems relevant:

1) Under the GENERAL heading, it lists actions which are prohibited from being committed while using their Service. In particular, “Restricting or inhibiting any other user from using or enjoying the Internet, impairing the operations or efficiency of the Service or creating an unusually large burden on our networks, or otherwise generating levels of Internet traffic sufficient to impede other users’ ability to transmit or receive information.”

This may be a viable reason for restricting the internet connection speed of a single individual. However, this is not the case. Connection speeds to the web services and web sites I have mentioned are throttled for everyone, regardless of how much bandwidth they use or otherwise.

It is important to note that HOTFILE.COM is not a P2P service. It is a direct download over HTTP, using standard ports. It should not be throttled according to their own practices. Also, having a premium account with the HOTFILE.COM service does not matter – Bell is actively throttling the connection to this website as a whole.

I believe Bell should be required to specify which websites it throttles on their Network Management website in order to allow customers to make truly informed decisions.

Links:
1) http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r24012235-Hotfile-IS-throttled. This page shows screen captures comparing other direct download services and their speeds, with speeds from HOTFILE.com while using a Bell internet service connection. The speeds achieved are at most 256kbit/s – in line with their P2P traffic management practices.

2) http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r24729541-So-Hotfile-is-throttled-During-What-Times Customers have found that the times correspond to the times used for their P2P traffic management practices.

No related posts.

Anyways, long story short – un-installing NOD32 and installing Microsoft Security Essentials (which is more than good enough anyways) seems to let me sync things. Jungle Disk is still giving odd errors but I’ll see if I can work through them.

Not ready to ditch Dropbox yet — but it does keep reminding me I’m getting close to running out of space :/

Related posts:

1. Jungle Disk – great idea, but…

Problem with dropbox’s paid service however, was that I was using only 2gb. It seemed like overkill to upgrade to a 50gb account for $10/month. I then remembered from a while back when I was first looking into cloud backup/sync software of one called Jungle Disk. It sounded great – uses Amazon S2 (as does dropbox) but with an open source client that gave you far more controla. Only reason I went with dropbox was because it was free and suited my needs at the time. So, it was time to give Jungle Disk another shot.

The sign up, payment and install processes went without a hitch. I decided to go with the “Jungle Disk Desktop” version, and hey turned out that with the base monthly fee they decided to include 5gb storage too – great! Payment was processed instantly and away I went!

On installing the program, it presents you with a wizard to help you set up your first ‘drive’. I figured I’d just enable all options and go from there – whether that’s a good thing or not I don’t know. To begin with, I wanted to sync my “My Dropbox” folder and if all goes well, I’d start with other folders too maybe – who knows? Yea, never got that far though. I set it to my drop box folder and let it sync over night. Waking up in the morning and expecting it to be complete I instead see several errors complaining it wasn’t able to upload one file or another and failed. It didn’t just skip the file (which from what I can tell, it’s supposed to!) but kept trying that same file over and over again until it finally gave up. So I figured, yea sure first time with the software – maybe it’s conflicting with dropbox already running in the background? So I gave that a close, and tried again. It got to the same file and stopped. No errors this time though (I was only able to check because of the logs I turned on from curiosity). Made changes to files? NEVER updated. I tried viewing what was saved on my disk via the virtual network drive – it only got bits of 2 main folders from about a dozen. Horrible!

Essentially, I’ve spent the last two days fighting with a horrible piece of software. It’s been constantly crashing on me whenever I try to make changes to configuration. And I’ve been making config changes trying to get it to sync successfully, if only just once! But every time it starts syncing, it gets to the same files and goes into an endless loop. Click cancel on the upload for that file? And it crashes! One of the files it was hanging up on was insignificant, so I decided to delete it but sure enough it finds another file to hang on.

I got frustrated to the point where I’ve decided to delete the virtual disk and try starting again. See where that leads me. If it -still- fails then I’ll contact support and see if the money I’m paying is worth it at all. If not, then I guess I’ll find something else. I’ve recently learned of another service called Mozy that seems to offer unlimited backup for around the same price as Jungle Disk’s base price but unlimited hosting of anything always makes me weary – more research would definitely be required. I’ve also been toying around with using Microsoft Mesh but the software is still a bit sluggish and doesn’t always sync properly. It also has no revision history which I’ve found can be VERY helpful!

Anyone else have any experience with Jungle Disk or other online backup/sync solutions? Any recommendations?

Related posts:

1. Jungle Disk – continued
2. Your site, saved and backed up on the S3 cloud!