Hi All, For most Corporate Network environments you will find that a good security gateway also comes with a website filter including ssl processing where the gateway acts as an ssl proxy. With this technology the vendors are able - to a point - to block users from accessing the avoidance sites from being accessed from inside the network, this works well for controlling unwanted traffic to the range of 80-95%. R D On Tuesday, May 1, 2012, Watchman wrote:
Getting the allocated bandwidth to route through torrents.
Watchman.
Sent from my iPhone
On May 1, 2012, at 9:18 PM, John Gitau <jgitau@gmail.com> wrote:
Solution to what problem?
Sent from my iPad
On 1 May 2012, at 20:52, Watchman <skunkingrahim@gmail.com> wrote:
So the Verdict is that there's no solution?
Sent from my iPhone
On May 1, 2012, at 2:34 PM, John Gitau <jgitau@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes but at that point the SP would be failing. Torrents are not bad. It's one of the most efficient technologies. If I'm paying for it I expect good service. And that's why I have an issue specifically with zuku, none with safaricom. Zuku bills me for 4mb every month. Safaricom never made such a promise to me.
Also note there is a big difference in how this capacity gets delivered.gsm/ 3G is really expensive. A good radio network to deliver it is expensive. Billing you is expensive, now compare it to wifi, gpon, WiMAX, lte etc. those are cheap. For guys like safaricom the only way to ensure efficiency is to exit user data as close to a user as possible.
They call it hsdpa offload, wifi offload , you can use gpon too etc it's just a fancy way of saying get users data where it's going as close to them as possible. It's also how you scale wifi and gpon and whatever else you offer. If your DNs server is 500 ms away, it won't help that the server serving the actual data is 50ms away.
So maybe I agree with you in the sense that most SP's need to re look/ rework their designs especially as they get to the counties/expand.
Gitau
Sent from my iPad
On 1 May 2012, at 13:54, John Doe <fivepings@gmail.com> wrote:
But there is still a challenge, even if torrenting users pay a premium, they will still strain the network. The other none premium users still need guaranteed service. Fair usage policies would still be required....Safcom should speak to wananchi:-)
Sent from my iPad
On May 1, 2012, at 7:43 AM, John Gitau <jgitau@gmail.com> wrote:
well note the following: Until a while back while Safaricom had an 'unlimited' bundle (not on through put) it was unlimited in the sense that you could cumulatively download as much as you want in a month, their biggest issue was I bet torrents.
Right now you'd be mad to do 45Gb downloads on Safaricom 3G, it would be too costly and I think/believe thats the best formula for dealing with 'torrent' guys. Have them pay for their usage.
Trying to block ports is just plain silly.
On the enterprise end, a good properly integrated bandwidth manager, linked to a billing system can also do some upper layer inspection and bill you appropriately. And yes there are open source tools for this too. Just alot of work to get them to do what you want. So yes encrypting traffic might help, running through VPN's might work too. However for those I would just enforce a very strict fair use policy if I were an SP.
This way even hiding behind TOR or some other fancy mechanism doesn't work around the fact that we only care about the data we see from you. It does however create interesting fun scenarios for net neutrality advocates:-) no Im not one of them - you better be paying for what you use:-)
another trick:-) run IPv6 in your home. I bet no one can inspect that yet.
Gitau
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 9:14 PM, Alex Nderitu <nderitualex@gmail.com>wrote:
May be they have it. Just not using it yet. On Apr 30, 2012 8:22 PM, "John Doe" <fivepings@gmail.com> wrote:
U wonder what solution they are using to thwart you guys that safaricom cannot get...
Sent from my iPad