3 ms·

First, no, this isn't coming to the US. Second, this doesn't make any sense. How would you avoid rate limits by using a VPN? The ISP is still sending and rece

First, no, this isn't coming to the US. Second, this doesn't make any sense. How would you avoid rate limits by using a VPN? The ISP is still sending and receiving all of that data for you.

ac29 9y ago
Step 1) Rate limit high bandwidth use sites to discourage use Step 2) Block VPNs to prevent circumvention of your rate limts Step 3) Profit? I don't see this happening, but I think that's what the comment you were responding to is suggesting.
- toomanybeersies 9y ago
  Why not just rate limit VPNs?
  - toyg 9y ago
    You are not thinking politically enough. If I rate-limit VPN outright, I'm an ugly dictator bent on destroying privacy. If I rate-limit popular bandwidth-intensive traffic, I'm just a guy trying to keep network usage fair for every user. If that involves limiting VPNs as well, they are simply collateral damage, the end justifies the means, and I'm still a good guy.
- derefr 9y ago
  They're using the wrong terminology, then; "ISP rate limits" refers to artificial bandwidth restrictions placed—at the data-link layer—on the last mile of a connection, to either upsell better plans or as proactive, aggressive form of QoS traffic-shaping to prevent oversubscribed head-end nodes from actually having to deal with multiple saturated downstream links they don't have the capacity to multiplex. You're talking here more about avoiding the preferential site-by-site traffic-class-based shaping that goes on when Net Neutrality is not enforced. Which doesn't really happen, because it's far easier to just have a thinner peerage link between the ISP and the content-provider in the first place, and then do regular QoSing on that thin pipe with priority to the people on better plans. (The result is exactly like telephone service on New Year's Eve: local calls go through just fine, but long-distance calls mostly fail because the POTS peerage links are saturated.)
Kim_Bruning 9y ago
Because -all else being equal- using a VPN effectively enforces network neutrality. ;-)
- MBCook 9y ago
  Is it 'net neutrality' if you have to pay for it? What prevents companies from artificially slowing things coming from known VPN endpoints?
Spooky23 9y ago
You may recall that before Title 2 was asserted by the FCC, ISPs would prohibit "commercial use" in their consumer AUPs and once in awhile enforce this against someone who was telecommuting. Time Warner affiliates would charge you an additional $20/mo for business access.
- tedunangst 9y ago
  Not that I can recall, and I'm having a hard time finding anything about this. There's "business class" which means you get to run inbound servers, and maybe send email, etc. but I can't find any penalties for something like VPNing to an office network.

First, no, this isn't coming to the US. Second, this doesn't make any sense. How would you avoid rate limits by using a VPN? The ISP is still sending and receiving all of that data for you.

ac29 9y ago

Step 1) Rate limit high bandwidth use sites to discourage use Step 2) Block VPNs to prevent circumvention of your rate limts Step 3) Profit? I don't see this happening, but I think that's what the comment you were responding to is suggesting.

toomanybeersies 9y ago
Why not just rate limit VPNs?
- toyg 9y ago
  You are not thinking politically enough. If I rate-limit VPN outright, I'm an ugly dictator bent on destroying privacy. If I rate-limit popular bandwidth-intensive traffic, I'm just a guy trying to keep network usage fair for every user. If that involves limiting VPNs as well, they are simply collateral damage, the end justifies the means, and I'm still a good guy.
derefr 9y ago
They're using the wrong terminology, then; "ISP rate limits" refers to artificial bandwidth restrictions placed—at the data-link layer—on the last mile of a connection, to either upsell better plans or as proactive, aggressive form of QoS traffic-shaping to prevent oversubscribed head-end nodes from actually having to deal with multiple saturated downstream links they don't have the capacity to multiplex. You're talking here more about avoiding the preferential site-by-site traffic-class-based shaping that goes on when Net Neutrality is not enforced. Which doesn't really happen, because it's far easier to just have a thinner peerage link between the ISP and the content-provider in the first place, and then do regular QoSing on that thin pipe with priority to the people on better plans. (The result is exactly like telephone service on New Year's Eve: local calls go through just fine, but long-distance calls mostly fail because the POTS peerage links are saturated.)

Kim_Bruning 9y ago

Because -all else being equal- using a VPN effectively enforces network neutrality. ;-)

MBCook 9y ago
Is it 'net neutrality' if you have to pay for it? What prevents companies from artificially slowing things coming from known VPN endpoints?

Spooky23 9y ago

You may recall that before Title 2 was asserted by the FCC, ISPs would prohibit "commercial use" in their consumer AUPs and once in awhile enforce this against someone who was telecommuting. Time Warner affiliates would charge you an additional $20/mo for business access.

tedunangst 9y ago
Not that I can recall, and I'm having a hard time finding anything about this. There's "business class" which means you get to run inbound servers, and maybe send email, etc. but I can't find any penalties for something like VPNing to an office network.