Observing traffic prioritization in Comcast’s network

[ars]

"Because the Xfinity traffic is mapped to a different DOCSIS service flow when prioritized, it is exempted from the downstream rate limit, so my total bandwidth usage stays consistently higher than my service tier would normally allow."

And? So what's the problem? That's sounds exactly right to me: The xfinity traffic runs over and above any bandwidth limits you have for your regular internet.

i.e. using xfinity has zero negative effect on your regular bandwidth.

Was that the point you were trying to make? That comcast is doing this right? Because if you were trying to accuse comcast of "prioritization of traffic in violation of the terms of the Comcast/NBCU Consent Decree." then your post proves exactly the opposite of that.

[bdb]

If you read the decree:

  If Comcast offers consumers Internet Access Service under a
  package that includes caps, tiers, metering, or other
  usage-based pricing, it shall not measure, count, or 
  otherwise treat Defendants’ affiliated network traffic 
  differently from unaffiliated network traffic.  Comcast
  shall not prioritize Defendants’ Video Programming or
  other content over other Persons’ Video Programming or
  other content.

It's not about Comcast using your bandwidth, it's about them offering services which third party providers "can't," because their traffic is not treated equally.

[edit: formatting]

[jostmey]

My advice is to stay away, far away, from Comcast. I wish I never had the misfortune of having to work with such an incompetent, corrupt organization. But alas, I am stuck in a year long contract that auto-renews without my re-authorization.

[zbowling]

Sooo.... if comcast prioritizes Xfinity traffic at a DOCSIS level and not an IP level, it's not violating net neutrality?

[bdb]

hey Zac. I'm the author of the post.

That, or something like it, is Comcast's argument. Which makes no sense. This is a video streaming service, it's prioritized, and it's delivered just like other video streaming services are. Hopefully the data reflects this.

[Cyndre]

The important part to this article isn't that they are doing this. Its that they are back tracking on their own statements of why the caps were needed in the first place.

If you remember when they were arguing for the caps the main reason was the cost to deliver to the last mile. This clearly shows that is not the case as they have given all of their customers additional bandwidth above and beyond their stated plans.

Kind of makes the reason for caps in the first place null and void.

[awolf]

When I load this on my iPad a white div appears and covers up the text after the page finishes loading. Anyone else?

[ghshephard]

Yes - completely unreadable on an iPad for me, alas!

[thirdsun]

Yes, same for me.

[bdb]

Fixed. Sorry!

[WireSpeed]

So, hypothetically speaking, modifying traffic as it flows through a linux firewall in order to change the DSCP field to the values used by Comcast would be useful in avoiding the caps on traffic levels.

[cllunsford]

This article only looked at downstream traffic, so all the bandwidth management is done before you can touch the packets. On the upstream, Comcast is certainly re-marking (overwriting) the QoS values based on their own priorities.