RESNET PERFORMANCE UPDATE

[CrAzYfOoL]

I just received this email:

As you will be aware, on Monday of this week there was a serious degradation
in service resulting in many of you being unable to use the ResNet
facility. This despite the fact that the overall bandwidth provision has
been increased 100% and now stands at 80Mb/s.

Our investigations have confirmed that this was due to peer to peer
filesharing applications in use by a minority of residents in some
buildings.

Subsequent to this, on Wednesday we took a decision, which was presented to
the ResNet Focus Group, to re-configure the Traffic Shaper to reflect this
activity. Two changes have been made:

1. In residences where known P2P protocols are in use, the bandwith usage
will be limited in order to prevent degradation of service elsewhere

2. In residences where no P2P protocols are in use, there will be a
guaranteed amount of bandwidth set aside to protect the quality of the
service offered to residents.

To date, reports from those residences in the latter category have been very
positive in terms of the response times experienced.

We have however identified that some residents in the following buildings
may continue to experience performance issues:

* International House
* Benefactors
* Redfern 9 and 10
* Arthur Vick 2
* Claycroft 1 and 2
* Heronbank
* Whitefields 1 to 9

This is due to peer to peer filesharing applications in use by a minority of
residents in those buildings; this is in clear breach of the acceptable use
policy and we are currently identifying the sources of these breaches in
order to disconnect and investigate each case. We will, as stated in the
AUP, take disciplinary action against anyone found to be in breach of the
AUP given the serious effect their actions are having on the majority of
their fellow residents.





Ruth Faulkner
IT Service Manager
University of Warwick
Coventry CV4 7AL
Tel: 024 7657 5871 (int 75871)
Mobile: 07876 217987


Looks bad =/ comments plz ?

[echelon]

Was this letter sent out to every on-campus resident?? or how come u were a recipient?

As you will be aware, on Monday of this week there was a serious degradation in service resulting in many of you being unable to use the ResNet facility. This despite the fact that the overall bandwidth provision has been increased 100% and now stands at 80Mb/s.

I reckon they're simply blaming p2p for the terrible conditions. They're here trying to make it sound like they've suddenly delivered an amazing upgrade.. Problem is many other unis are giving as much 100-200MB/s for their on-campus residences.. and some of these have smaller campus facilities thus the connection is shared between less.. So its still not a very remarkable connection!

Our investigations have confirmed that this was due to peer to peer filesharing applications in use by a minority of residents in some buildings.

Hmm I'd love to see the research these investigations delivered. I dont trust the validity. If they properly blocked bittorrent protocols then that should not be functioning and most of the other p2p apps are not harmful to the system in the same way and should thus not affect the overall system enought to create the serious degradation in service.

Subsequent to this, on Wednesday we took a decision, which was presented to the ResNet Focus Group, to re-configure the Traffic Shaper to reflect this activity.

Who is in this ResNet Focus Group and do these ppl actually have any knowledge needed to properly argue wit ITS.. cus it would be easy enough for ITS to run normal students over wit lots of pretty words that leave most students at a loss.. I hope on-campus students make sure the ppl representing them are capable of the job. I certainly wouldn't trust most ppl to represent me in this case. And also it seems that ITS simply inform the ResNet Focus Group it doesnt allow the group any influence.

We have however identified that some residents in the following buildings may continue to experience performance issues:

* International House
* Benefactors
* Redfern 9 and 10
* Arthur Vick 2
* Claycroft 1 and 2
* Heronbank
* Whitefields 1 to 9

Ok so they're saying that those are the only residences using p2p apps.. Hmm unless things have seriously changed I would be surprised that only those residences are using any form of p2p. But hey its an interesting statistic if its true

this is in clear breach of the acceptable use policy and we are currently identifying the sources of these breaches in order to disconnect and investigate each case.

Well now the AUP has been changed so many times and without informing the users. I'm not sure that AUP is even legal anymore.. U cant change a policy like that without properly informing the users involved.. I kno for a fact that most ResNet users have no idea the AUP has changed this term. And certainly not how many times it has change (which is still rising)

We will, as stated in the AUP, take disciplinary action against anyone found to be in breach of the AUP given the serious effect their actions are having on the majority of their fellow residents.

Well at least we have confirmation that they're gonna enforce the AUP. This may mean that campus users will start to see fines popping in their doors

I still cant believe they're indirectely saying they will fine u for using skype. Or at least take evasive action against u.. Thats ridiculous. Who decided that p2p was created by the devil. P2P apps have many useful and legal purposes. U cant ban something because it has the potential to be used for illegal purposes!

[BigJon]

I think it is rather bad behaviour making broad threats to a lot of users and trying to creat witchunts and deflecting the attention off the bad service they provide.

Since educational institutions fall under the Freedom of information act can't you technically get your hands on the report supposedly showing that p2p was the cause.

If they were in fair competition they'd go out of buisness pretty sharpish threatening their users like that.

[Anon101]

This is actually insanity on their behalf:

In residences where known P2P protocols are in use, the bandwith usage will be limited in order to prevent degradation of service elsewhere

Hang on, so what there saying, is whether your filesharing or not, if you happen to be in a residence with people who are there going to diminish your internet. points to make about this:

1. If they have information to find which induvidual IP's are using these protocals, then why not just slow them? why take it out on everyone else too?
2. They are treating us like kids, not paying customers. I'm sure in a buisiness envinronment this would not be legal, to punish large groups in such a caliver attitude.

They imply in the start of the email that it's due to internet file sharing, if they allowed on campus DC++ again surely this would reduce this problem. I fail to see how they are possibly under any legal liability to ban P2P within their network, they are acting as an ISP for university residents, when was the last time an ISP (such as AOL) was sued for allowing customers to use P2P. Which brings me to a point, there is no mention of the legal threats they were mentioning all the time at the beggining of this term. I want an update, are they still "recieving letters"!!!? and by the way, it would be nice to know exactly what these "letters" said.

P.S. No-one in Rootes file sharing! hah! i don't understand how they generate this "degridation list". Kinda annoyed that theyve slowed whitefields, and it is very slow, and not rootes.

[PanMaster]

I think anyone that uses P2P over the internet should be fined; I wouldn't want Quake 4 to lag on me so someone can get the latest Lost episode or some similar rubbish.
The LAN bandwidth seems to be a bit on the lowside, I'm sure I can do 1000Mbps but its only running at 100 for some reason.

[cocodude]

I think anyone that uses P2P over the internet should be fined; I wouldn't want Quake 4 to lag on me so someone can get the latest Lost episode or some similar rubbish.

You *are* joking, surely? I'm sure many people consider your Quake 4 game to be rubbish. All they need to do is implement a decent traffic shaping scheme and everything's sorted.

Cocodude

[CrAzYfOoL]

i dont know who else got the email i just posted it to see if i was the only one ? i assumed everyone got it as it concerns the whole of RESNET but its a pathetic attempt to blame the poor network performance on p2p

[Anon101]

They are in breach of their own service policy, since the policy states:

Student Computing commits to:

Providing a managed local area network and a high capacity connection to the Internet

Providing an up-to-date web site at www.warwick.ac.uk/go/studentcomputing

The first, is wrong, because at the moment there are many people with restricted, definately not high capacity internet, 10kbps Download is ISDN speed.

Secondly, to restrict bandwith of certain halls/residences due to p2p usage, at the very list they should have a real time list of exactly where they have restricted bandwith on their website.

[vDisGruntled]

Not to mention this bit of disinformation on the "up-to-date" website:

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/services/its/ ... q/using/#1

How can I transfer files between computers on the network?

Most instant messaging clients such as MSN Messenger, Yahoo! Messenger and AOL Instant Messenger (AIM) will allow you to send and receive files to or from others on your buddy list. This is probably the easiest method of transferring individual files across the network.

Certain peer-to-peer file sharing clients or FTP software may allow you to share larger numbers of files with others on the network. You should ensure you are not breaching any applicable copyright laws by doing this.

Now in my mind, this is not only not banning the use of p2p software but actually suggesting that it would a good way of sharing legal files over the network.

[Phoenix]

I think anyone that uses P2P over the internet should be fined; I wouldn't want Quake 4 to lag on me so someone can get the latest Lost episode or some similar rubbish.
The LAN bandwidth seems to be a bit on the lowside, I'm sure I can do 1000Mbps but its only running at 100 for some reason.

Oi you hypocritical Knobend! Methinks, you got Quake 4 from Twofo and you were dloading over 5Gbs from me the other day so what the f*ck are you trying to say!

[CrAzYfOoL]

PanMaster, really ur just a leech and then complain cos u cant get on twofo and complain some more about the p2p when you have used it to obtain quake so just do us all a favour and STFU plz XD

[Zeus]

he cant get on twofo because he continiously gets banned by us because he's the god of retards. ur status hasnt change, ur still as dumb as ever, selfish as ever, and if u hadnt figured out yet... ur a retard....

how bout u pull ur head out of ur arse?? u may have a 1gb LAN card, but if u hadnt figured this one out yet also, most people on campus have just a 100mb card, some even just a 10mb card.

also as quoted previously, everyone uses p2p, its useful and you're just bitter, also - don't give us your IP for a hub, its by far the dumbest thing u can do. i will have fun removing ur posts should they include your IP for a hub. there are enough hubs at the moment, and ur being quite the hypocritial retard, u think any1 should be fined for p2p, yet ur thinking of running a hub?

yeah, total retard.... i am well aware my arguments are not very clear and well structured, but ive been drinking. nonetheless, and i beleive i speak for every1 here when i say - shut up.

[Phoenix]

I thought that was quite well put actually.

[nozmadamus]

Guys I 'd just like to mention that NOT eveyone connected to the RESNET got
this email!
I don't know how they decided to which ppl they 're gonna send the
email!
But I 'm realy curious on the criteria they used in order to determine the "apropriate" recipients!
Btw to what I 've heard ppl in Lakeside got it as well (Lakeside isn't mentioned in the email)!

[Squee]

Just to check: the sharing of copyrighted material without copyright holder's permission, which is what like 99% of p2p traffic consists of, is illegal isn't it?

So surely no matter how bad ITS is, we're still in the wrong...?