on 25-04-2011 13:28
Hi Anthony,
and i agree it is not fair to text only users to get hit by this but even if p2p and nntp was in 2 managment queues you would get 12.5% of traffic per protocol. it would still mean you would be chocked by nntp users.
Not necessarily - I'm not saying that they should simply apply the two seperately but at the same time across the board. What I'm saying is that they should apply it conditionally, on a per protocol basis and at a UBR level (and even better would be a user level - the same as the rest of their traffic shaping: It is NEVER fair to penalise one user for the actions of another, which is what they are doing.)
What that means is that if and only if there is a high NNTP useage on any given UBR should NNTP be restricted on that UBR. (or 'by any user ... for that user').
Also, as if this isn't obvious by now, I'm unconvinced that the number of NNTP users / amount of NNTP bandwidth usage supports this policy at all. Although I'm extrapolating from the comparitively small number of people I know who use the internet and, consequently, turn to me when things go wrong (versus a nationwide ISP's user numbers), in my experience usenet goes largely ignored and unheard of. For most people, it seems the internet isn't a great deal more than the world wide web (even for email) and the PS3 [or gaming platform of choice] network. (And for some read Facebook instead of the world wide web). It seems to me that NNTP is for old timers like me who hark back to the days when computers were far too expensive for the average Joe to afford, and we didn't have to keep giving up our time to fix the damned things for them.
I have this niggling suspicion, therefore, that they've made the decision by saying "Okay, how much bandwidth is being sucked up by (NNTP and P2P)?" rather than "Okay, how much bandwidth is being sucked up by NNTP, and how much by P2P?" - that's why I've asked for some verifiable, supporting data. (And is that data purely for Virgin Media, or have they simply latched onto figures provided from elsewhere?)
I'd love to see vm offering a text only server that is excluded from the traffic shaping. this would have to limit the groups to text only and limit in such a way to not allow binaries to be posted al all.
The problem with that is they would have to carry all the newsgroups that might be required - including some that are on internal company servers that can be accessed by employees from home, but are otherwise private, so it's an approach that falls over, right there. (Which is another reason this policy is so ludicrous and ill-conceived - thankfully, though, I'm not in that situation.)
on 26-04-2011 19:59
It's evening on the first normal working day after the Easter bank holidays - and my subsequent questions posted (just about) yesterday morning remain unanswered, even though there are posts plainly visible from members of forum team that were made today.
I would like to remind the forum team that nobody else can authoritatively answer the questions I posed, only those people who work for Virgin-on-a-brain-cell Media - such as said forum team. There is therefore no reason to delay answering in case someone else is able to. Doing so just serves to underline the apparent contempt the company holds for its customers.
I will summarise my original question and the response, and reiterate the subsequent questions.
I originally asked if P2P and NNTP were being treated (as they should be) independently of one another for the purpose of your traffic choking, or if they were being handled together as one. The answer that came back from Neil_D of the forum team was that they were not independent of one another, giving a reason that failed to explain why that is the case.
My subsequent questions, therefore:
I also pointed out after raising the first of these questions that I realised it might require a delay while a proper answer was obtained from someone in a higher position (which applies in spades to the second), in which case I would expect a prompt response to say you in the process of chasing up that answer.
There has been no response from you, however - not to answer the questions themselves, and nor to say you are looking to obtain an answer. Despite it being plainly obvious there are forum team members working today, having posted to other discussions, as noted above.
I say again: There is no reason to delay responding, as per the normal policy on these forums, since nobody other than employees of Virgin-on-a-standstill Media can provide an answer.
Do I take this silence as confirmation that you are unable to provide an answer, and that the real answers are therefore as I suspect them to be? Which pretty much boils down to incompetence and ineptitude.
on 02-05-2011 17:58
Let's call a spade a spade shall we.
You, I and VM are well aware of what NNTP and P2P means to their subscribers... Bittorrent and Usenet, or more specifically The Pirate Bay et al and Newzbin etc.
It should be obvious to anyone why the NNTP and P2P protocols are treated the same as far as "fair use" policies go, and it's disingenuous to feign ignorance to be honest.
on 22-07-2011 07:24
I found this forum, and am replying to this old thread, because here in Bristol this is becoming just about intolerable. Today is the third or fourth day running that I have received (I think) less than 100 newsgroup messages from roughly a dozen TEXT-ONLY newsgroups.
There are many possible reasons why, but the prime suspect (since I live in a bandwidth-swallowing district of Bristol) has to be Virgin's NNTP-throttling policy. Reading archived postings, the lack of intelligent feedback from Virgin as to why such an obviously ridiculous policy has been implemented is duly noted. It's shameful.
@Virgin: if you, as support people, don't feel comfortable enough (or don't have the authority) to answer on behalf of the company FIND SOMEONE WHO DOES and badger them until you get their co-operation. It reflects VERY BADLY on Virgin's corporate culture that customers are seen as cash cows, and those who make decisions evidently don't want to be accountable for them to their customers.
Some of us have been using the Internet for twenty years (commercially). These problems are not new, and management of them isn't difficult. Throttling a protocol such as NNTP is every bit as ridiculous as throttling HTTP, in other words, quite arbitrary. If there is some obscure technical reason relating to Virgin's infrastructure that means it's the only solution, LET'S HEAR IT.
Let's be clear: this is not at all an intractible problem. Demon came up with an effective solution many, many years ago by operating a text-only news server, alongside one that permitted binary groups in a deliberately managed and limited way. That worked extremely well - text news was fast and current. When I cancelled my longstanding contract with them, in favour of Virgin, Demon were going through a bad patch, having changed hands several times, etc. I am now beginning to seriously regret the decision and will review it in the light of this thread.
It is the work of moments to create a list of text-only newsgroups and barely longer to create such a server. For most sensible people, under most circumstances, this is the ideal solution. You might even charge extra for access to the binary service -- I suspect those of us who don't have any interest in it would be highly relieved.
Usenet, for grown-ups, is one of the best features of the Internet. Advice, help, and community between those of shared interests, at very low overhead (if it's text!). That, and text-based email, were the two reasons I got my first Internet access subscription in 1991 (and it wasn't cheap!), and they remain high on my list of the most useful things about the Internet.
It's indicative of Virgin's apparent lack of understanding of the issue too, that I have to type this into a web-based application, rather than submit it to a low-bandwidth newsgroup.
So come on Virgin management: answer the reasonable questions posted TWO MONTHS AGO. Right now, you are alienating the customers you really want -- moderate, intelligent and reasonable, low-bandwidth users, who don't want to flit butterfly-like between ISPs, but will remain loyal to a supplier giving a good service.
It's still a competitive market out there. You have a HUGE advantage with fibre in the pavement, but you are wasting it with what seems on the face of it to be pig-headedness. Fibre and co-ax are no use to me, a customer, if they don't let me do the very things I need to.
I wouldn't be complacent about this if I were in Virgin management. I don't pay your monthly bill out of charity. I've been prepared to live with loss of service for days at a time, routing issues and so on, because everyone has technical problems occasionally. I am NOT, however, prepared to tolerate arbitrary policies that disadvantage me, a sensible, moderate Internet user, when there is at least one easy fix available to you.
I strongly suggest, when you read this, that you refer it up the line, until some manager with enough guts to actually make a decision realises there is a problem. You may not think one 'Mr. Angry' matters much, but I'll leave you to do the traffic analysis, to see how many others like me are in the same cohort. Can you afford to lose all of us?
Your call.
on 22-07-2011 11:08
--------------------------------------------------
I found this forum, and am replying to this old thread, because here in Bristol this is becoming just about intolerable. Today is the third or fourth day running that I have received (I think) less than 100 newsgroup messages from roughly a dozen TEXT-ONLY newsgroups.
--------------------------------------------------
If you are using news.virginmedia.com as your server, then try another server like this one:
http://www.eternal-september.org/
It is free and only does text newsgroups.
on 22-07-2011 18:47
Thanks for that link. It looks good and will be addedto my list of news servers!
The fact remains, however, that, if Virgin is throttling NNTP traffic by locality, it is arbitrarily penalising customers like myself who do not use binary groups (ever, at all), and behaving in a high-handed and ultimately stupid manner.
I note, at close of busnies today, there hasn't even been an acknowledgement from Virgin -- I'd be delighted to be told I'm wrong by them...
on 22-07-2011 19:17
--------------------------------------------------
The fact remains, however, that, if Virgin is throttling NNTP traffic by locality, it is arbitrarily penalising customers like myself who do not use binary groups (ever, at all), and behaving in a high-handed and ultimately stupid manner.
I note, at close of busnies today, there hasn't even been an acknowledgement from Virgin -- I'd be delighted to be told I'm wrong by them...
--------------------------------------------------
Mark_Wilkin posted this:
<quote>
We've investigated and identified the issues affecting some of our Usenet News users and we're going to be implementing an engineering change to our traffic management system this evening. We believe this will resolve the reported problems and improve our customers' Usenet experience.
</quote>
I have not seen any of the problems using text groups since he posted that to be fair to VM.
Unfortunately, the more we post into this thread the further down the pecking order it goes in regards to getting a reply from support.