
BeWifi lets you steal your neighbor’s bandwidth when they’re not using it - a_olt
http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/01/bewifi-lets-you-steal-your-neighbors-bandwidth-when-theyre-not-using-it/
======
chimeracoder
> What if, when you were up at a ridiculous hour Skyping your relatives in
> Australia, you could borrow unused bandwidth from your sleeping neighbors to
> make your own broadband connection faster and stronger?

Maybe this makes sense if you're lucky enough to have FiOS (which gives you a
dedicated line). For me (a Time Warner customer), this is already the case.
Except, it's not "borrowing" so much as it is "stealing".

Technically, I should have 2.5MB/s down (20Mb/s is what I pay for), but in
reality, I'm often lucky to get 1MB/s, because my neighbors are using the
Internet and watching Netflix, etc. And I have _never_ observed more than
2.5MB/s, so it doesn't average out.

Theoretically, this should already be illegal, but it's still very common in
practice.

For this inconsistent connection (and no other services!), I am forced to pay
over $50/month.

 _Edit_ : Updated - I pay for 20Mb/s, not 15Mb/s.

~~~
tssva
FiOS doesn't give you a dedicated line. FiOS uses one wavelength to transmit
downstream traffic. All subscribers on a segment (up to 32 or 64) receive all
downstream traffic. Your ONU discards the traffic not intended for you. The
headend limits the amount of traffic destined for your ONU according to your
rate plan. All subscribers on a segment share another wavelength for sending
traffic. TDMA is used on the upstream. The number of slots assigned to your
ONU varies depending upon your rate plan. Also dynamic bandwidth allocation
can be used to adjust the number of slots assigned to an ONU based upon the
traffic being sent by the ONU.

FiOS uses dynamic bandwidth allocation to enable oversubscription on a
segment; therefore, FiOS spends can be impacted by the usage of your neighbors
just as cable can be.

~~~
wmf
Realistically, 2.488 Gbps shared by 32-64 customers is pretty damn good; it's
a bare minimum of 38 Mbps/customer. That's like having your own DOCSIS 1.0
channel.

------
bladedtoys
Telefonica is also an isp. Or more exactly it is the isp in Spain: it owns the
wires and has overwhelming dominance in the market.

So (@dangrossman) the legal issue is averted: both costumers are in the same
isp which, to them, works like a black box. So the article's use of the word
"steal" is quite nonsensical.

Also remarkable is the advanced anticipation of demand. For example, Netflix
is not even available in Spain and bandwidth demand is currently low compared
to say the US. My guess is that it is not to facilitate video over the
internet etc. but that it is a cheap way to undercut competition from Vodfone
and Orange (other Spanish providers). Bandwidth sharing might mean more
consistent high bandwidth for those who need it.

Actually the potential issue is inverted: you may not be able not opt out of
the system.

The other potential issue is Telefonica itself. Historically it has been as
appalling company to customers. It is possible this is changing but there
certainly used to be a long track record of awfulness. Indeed it is my utter
shock that Telefonica of all companies on earth would manage to do something
of this sort that is compelling me to ramble on like this.

If Telefonica is changing, kudos!

------
k3oni
My neighbor is already using my WiFi, he was paying $10 to AOL(yes there are
still ppl using AOL) for dial-up so i gave him WiFi for free :).

~~~
mrkickling
That's very kind of you. Our neighbor has an open WiFi that my family uses
when our WiFi is misbehaving. I wish I could give something back, but I don't
even know which neighbor it is.

~~~
k3oni
Well he's a bit older and struggling with money as it is, i actually got him a
directional antenna and installed a omnidirectional one in my house for him to
get a good reception.. Hes mostly playing on-line games and checking his email
and the stock market.

------
crazygringo
Using the example in the article, how is it technically possible for me to
Skype with someone, while dividing the stream between two IP addresses (of the
two different routers)?

I mean, Skype's going to be sending my conversational partner's audio to a
single IP address that represents me, no? How could that be divided among
multiple people's bandwidth, technically speaking?

~~~
dangrossman
It probably doesn't. It can still take advantage of the pooling by, for
example, routing your Skype call through your neighbor's connection because
yours is already busy streaming Netflix in another room.

My concern would be my neighbor downloading movie torrents on my connection
while I'm asleep. We'd need a _really_ strong legal precedent that the person
paying for the connection isn't responsible for what others do on it before
this kind of thing could catch on in most countries.

~~~
gingerlime
Shouldn't this (in a better world), be the opposite however? _We 'd need a_
really _strong legal precedent that the person paying for the connection_ IS
_responsible for what others do on it_

~~~
dangrossman
Should cafes be bankrupted because a customer downloaded some music on the
store's wifi hotspot? If you lend someone a hammer and they use it to smash
someone else's window, you're not liable for that so long as you didn't know
that's what they were borrowing the hammer to do. I think, generally, you
should never be in a situation where you're liable for crimes someone else
committed without your knowledge and assistance.

------
zackmorris
Maybe a stupid question but - are there regulations ISPs might use against
this? I know it's illegal in most places to resell your bandwidth to neighbors
and I wouldn't put it past them to equate giving away with selling.

I also wonder if HBO and other channels might get overzealous and shut people
down for the p2p nature of it.

But all that said, this is the obvious future of the web until we have a true,
free, ad hoc/distributed network and on some level I can't believe it took
this long to get the ball rolling..

~~~
hueving
Is it actually illegal to resell? I was under the impression that it was just
a contractual agreement with the provider not to resell.

------
pmorici
Sounds like a slight twist on Fon[0] The problem for things like this is it is
only really useful if it is ubiquitous in your area hopefully they have a plan
to kickstart adoption otherwise who cares.

[0] [https://corp.fon.com/en](https://corp.fon.com/en)

~~~
kaoD
In Spain is customary for ISPs to provide routers to their customers. They'll
just have to install their custom firmware (which I think they do already) and
get the customer to opt-in (or not opt-out, given recent trends). It's easier
to take your customers to opt-in if you're a _huge_ company like Telefónica.

------
vr000m
MPTCP and MPRTP to the rescue... these also have inbuilt algorithms to pick
the best interface.

[http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-singh-avtcore-
mprtp](http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-singh-avtcore-mprtp) (for skype and
multimedia)

[https://tools.ietf.org/wg/mptcp/](https://tools.ietf.org/wg/mptcp/) (for
everything else, even Siri)

~~~
windexh8er
It was interesting to see everyone rage about how amazing Apple was to be
leveraging MPTCP in the latest version of iOS. However most don't realize the
implications and risks that these types of things bring to generalized use
cases and operational models of networking and paid for data buckets.

Regardless it looks like these guys are just taking the Commotion firmware and
re-branding it as a service. It also doesn't solve the local node problem.
Most people don't understand how cable (HFC), fiber and copper (DSL) are built
out to the neighborhood or 'node'. It's all oversubscribed and shared. So this
type of solution really does nothing for the local congestion in a node. To
me, this is a pure marketing gimmick.

~~~
vr000m
At the networking stack level, it depends on how one implements congestion
control. AFAIR, in the case of Apple/MPTCP: they were sending the same packet
on both the interfaces and hoping for the best delay (a really bad idea)
unless you are in a managed network else you are just creating unnecessary
congestion.

OTOH, if the last mile is oversubscribed, there is very little one can do.

------
matthewcford
BT already do this in the UK with their infinity routers, they run a separate
public channel (BTWiFi), I've got one in my flat right now.

Anyone can connect to it for free if you're a BT customer elsewhere or you can
pay. It doesn't effect my bandwidth as most plans are unlimited anyway.

------
pablovidal85
Now I understand why Telefónica forced me to have WEP 128 that was
automatically generated from the SSID. After I asked them to set up my own
password (the router was password protected) they suggested I tell them what
password I wanted over the phone. I switched ISP two weeks ago.

------
ballard
This reminds me of Radiuz, but the problem was that it was a double-ended
userbase that needed far more press and capital to survive.

[http://wifinetnews.com/archives/2004/06/radiuz_combines_wpa-...](http://wifinetnews.com/archives/2004/06/radiuz_combines_wpa-
enterprise_with_free_access.html)

Perhaps this solves the problem of not having to deliver as much aggregate
bandwidth as isolated pipes on a per carrier basis, but cross carriers may or
may not go for it, like "roaming."

------
gootik
In an ideal world of BeWifi everyone will be a member and the internet will be
shared between all the members. Does this mean if we all downgraded our
connections to the basic offering of our choice ISP we could still get a
decent connection and in return force ISPs to lower their prices for higher
connections? Seems like a never ending cycle.

------
kirtijthorat
Liked it. Very intelligent way to utilize the spare bandwidth. One thing
everyone forgets is that we are actually paying for the full-month bandwidth
from Cable companies so they shouldn't worry if I use it 24 x 7 x 30 OR my
neighbor. As long as there is mechanism to give priority to the owner when he
demands the full bandwidth.

------
manishsharan
I thought this was very cool and would be happy to "lend" my neighbor my
unused bandwidth but then I thought what if my neighbor is skyping with a
cousin in Australia or wherever and this cousin orders his pizza from the same
pizzeria where a al-qaeda guys orders his pizza and lo behold I get put on a
no-fly list .

~~~
quantumpotato_
Well it sounds like "the terrorists" have won the war in your mind. Fearing
the state you turn your back on your neighbor.

------
TheLoneWolfling
...So my neighbor decides to download a torrent and all of a sudden I am hit
with a lawsuit? Unless this issue can be solved, no thanks.

------
S4M
So, I could download pedophile pictures with my neighbor's wifi bandwidth?

------
killahpriest
There's no way ISPs in the US will allow this.

~~~
SudoNick
Well, there is Comcast's program to deploy dual-WiFi APs. One side for the
subscriber, one side for Comcast to use as it sees fit (public hotspot being a
declared use):

[http://arstechnica.com/information-
technology/2013/06/comcas...](http://arstechnica.com/information-
technology/2013/06/comcast-turns-your-xfinity-modem-into-public-wi-fi-
hotspot/)

~~~
walshemj
so Comcast is going to be paying me for the use of my facilities to host its
plant cool - just like if i have a telegraph pole on my land I get rent.

~~~
SudoNick
It doesn't hurt to dream. Normally ;) BTW, this type of thing might be or
become more widespread than I initially thought:
[http://www.cablewifi.com/](http://www.cablewifi.com/)

------
kentwistle
This looks awesome

