
How to stop Time Warner Cable sucking at Youtube - Reebz
http://mitchribar.com/2013/02/time-warner-cable-sucks-for-youtube-twitchtv/
======
tensafefrogs
Hi, ex-youtube video eng here. (also posted this as a comment on the blog
post)

A while ago YouTube put together a speed information page that you could use
to check out your download speeds as well as compare to other isps in your
area:

<http://www.youtube.com/my_speed>

I'm also on Time Warner, and my graph shows wild inconsistencies - sometimes
it spikes up to much faster than others, sometimes it's way below the average
speed, and it also shows that Time Warner is the slowest provider out of all
of the NYC area ISPs.

I wish it was easier to switch to another provider out here.

~~~
raldi
That my_speed page says:

 _"The test video will show you your streaming information in real time (look
next to "Streaming HTTP")."_

Uh, where? I don't see that anywhere, and Ctrl-F "streaming" doesn't find it,
either.

~~~
Shank
I think they broke it - right click the video & hit "show video info" and
you'll see the debug information in the box in the top left. It now starts
with "TagStreamPlayer."

------
mikecane
I have been screaming at YouTube for being crap, especially lately. Five
seconds of a video would play, then I'd get like a thirty-second pause -- with
NO pre-load. I thought this was Google being even cheaper than they have been
(doing away with total pre-loads) but now I find out it's been TWC! My god!
They should be fined into non-existence.

~~~
cloudwalking
I suspect Google makes more money from showing you ads than they would save on
servers/bandwidth/etc by being skimpy.

~~~
mikecane
The odd thing is, on my primary desktop PC, I am rarely served ads. If I use a
Win 7 notebook via WiFi, _every_ YouTube video starts with an ad -- even if
it's a video I just watched on the desktop that had no ad. Go figure...

------
dangrossman
Is there any evidence TW is throttling versus these CDN servers you're being
routed to simply being slow or overloaded?

I've noticed a change in YouTube buffering on FiOS the past few weeks as well.
Other commenters here see it on Comcast. That may point to YouTube leaning
more heavily on a CDN that can't handle the traffic (or some hop along the
network to that CDN) rather than throttling by any one ISP.

~~~
clicks
I have TW... and I just tried what the guy suggested.

One hell of a difference. I'm pretty shocked that they're doing this. I always
thought it was Youtube that was being slow.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CB8UADuVM5A> is an accurate depiction of what
I just experienced right now.

~~~
dangrossman
That blocking the CDN improved your loading speed doesn't provide evidence of
throttling. It's equally plausible that the CDN is slow for everyone, whether
you're a Time Warner subscriber or not. The way to verify this would be to
connect to that CDN from different ISPs with similar routes and see if there
appears to be a hard cap in one connection but not the other.

~~~
bsphil
I'm on TWC and this fix with iptables just made a massive difference. Whether
it's throttling or not, I'm very impressed with the results.

------
wcchandler
It's funny, I actually spent a couple hours this evening troubleshooting this
problem. I don't think those IPs are complete, but it's a start.

For those with tomato firmware: Administration -> Scripts -> Firewall

iptables -I FORWARD -s 192.168.1.0/24 -d 173.194.55.0/24 -j REJECT

iptables -I FORWARD -s 192.168.1.0/24 -d 206.111.0.0/16 -j REJECT

~~~
lor3nzo
It can also be implemented using "Access Restriction" like this
<http://imgur.com/0sdc0CI>

~~~
wcchandler
Can you SSH into your router and do an `iptables --list` ? I'm thinking that
implementation uses the L7 chain. If that's the case then it may be a hair bit
quicker using my implementation. Also, the REJECT rule is a bit cleaner than
just dropping the packet, which I also suspect to be the case with "Access
Restriction" implementation.

~~~
lor3nzo
I can do iptables under the firewall settings, but ... it took me a while to
find my way through this setting and I know it works, I tested by streaming
YouTube content on AppleTV. I am going to leave it as it is.

If this workaround gets popular, I wonder if my provider (Comcast) and others
will catch up and throttle youtube directly.

So far so good.

------
altcognito
Weird, I could have used this thread four days ago. I cancelled my newly
purchased 18mb/s uverse account because youtube (and only youtube) was taking
20+ minutes to download 5 minute videos. I switched over the Brighthouse
(division of time warner I believe) because I still had an account and
everything was fine. When I contacted AT&T, all they did was tell me that
youtube was to blame and that I could purchase a tech support contract. I
declined :). There's a massive thread on the topic over here:
[http://forums.att.com/t5/Features-and-How-To/Hey-At-amp-T-
St...](http://forums.att.com/t5/Features-and-How-To/Hey-At-amp-T-Stop-
throttling-Youtube-I-d-very-much-appreciate-it/td-p/3094295)

~~~
ryanhuff
My YouTube experience with uverse has been very frustrating of late. I
routinely get streaming freezing, even on lower resolution streams. I have
been considering a switch to Time Warner, but perhaps that's not the best
solution.

~~~
altcognito
I checked the speed link given by the ex-youtube engineer and it showed that
Brighthouse was actually faster. Those are the exact symptoms I was having
(freezing -- basically zero download speed, not that the rendering stop taking
place) Not surprisingly enough, I think that it is very location dependent on
what ISP provides the best connectivity to a given service (e.g.: the internet
is very, very complicated network and it is hard to sum of the performance of
any point to point connection with one data point)

------
LAMike
Can TWC get in trouble for this? Isn't this a classic case of anti-competitive
practices? And I wonder if Comcast does the same thing for Netflix...

~~~
rhizome
I've had a non-cable DSL connection for years through the same independent
provider and noticed about 6-12mos ago that YT was doing the partial-buffer
thing. I haven't looked into this too much aside from reading this article and
comments, but I'm inclined to think that maybe the problem is with the CDNs
rather than TWC or any ISP.

------
trotsky
Measuring YouTube Quality of Experience for Users in Residential ISPs* Deep
Medhi dmedhi@umkc.edu University of Missouri–Kansas City February 2013 *Joint
work with Parikshit Juluri (UMKC), Louis Plissonneau (Orange Labs, France),
and Yong Zeng (UMKC)

[https://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog57/presentations/Tuesday...](https://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog57/presentations/Tuesday/tues.general.Medhi.Youtube.18.pdf)

tool you can run to measure your own performance with jitter and dropouts and
which caches your're being routed to:

<https://code.google.com/p/pytomo/>

For a bunch of internet enthusiasts y'all sure don't understand much about the
world beyond your aws cluster.

------
trustfundbaby
This actually helped a lot, as soon as videos started, the grey buffering
meter (that sits behind the red play meter) would shoot over to the other side
... I was actually astonished.

Alas there was one horrible side effect. Videos took forever to start playing,
and thumbnails for other videos on the screen (in the related videos section
and other image assets) would not load until afte the video started playing.

so close :\

~~~
Reebz
Some people are having more success using a deny rule, rather than reject.
This doesn't make sense to me, as there is a timeout wait element for deny
rules, but give it a shot.

------
ComputerGuru
Wow, I'm surprised at the level of assumptions being made in this thread.

Guys, some networking 101:

* The route your traffic takes to get from point a to point b depends on your network/ISP/etc

* The CDN you use when accessing YouTube, et. al. depends on the route you take. The first/nearest CDN to you is (usually, depending on the CDN owner's configuration) the one that will be used.

* The fact that a video loads quickly on one ISP and slowly on another means absolutely, completely, totally NOTHING in and of itself.

To find out if the ISP is to blame or not, you must attempt to access the same
CDN server from two different ISPs and see if you get the same problem. The
latency will be different, but unless there is a massive bandwidth or latency
bottleneck between two hops along either route, the overall bandwidth (for a
large enough file) should be sufficient to deduce whether or not the problem
is with your ISP or _the CDN servers corresponding to the route your ISP is
taking_ to contact Google's servers (the results need to be _statistically
significant_ taking into account margin of error and network conditions).

If the CDN is the problem, unless the CDN is actually _owned_ by your ISP,
your ISP _is not to blame_.

In fact, for traditional non-net-neutral throttling, _it does not matter_
which/how many CDN IPs you block. Your ISP should (if they're doing it right)
detect your connection to YouTube's subnet and throttle your data rates
_regardless of which CDN you use_. The CDNs in the original article belong to
Google/YouTube, _not_ TW. As such, TW would throttle your connection on the
way to Google's subnet, not _at_ Google's subnet. They have no control over
Google's subnet. The hops _past_ TW's (or whatever ISP you use) servers are
not under their control, cannot be bandwidth-throttled by them, and have
nothing to do with net neutrality.

The real explanation is most likely poorly-balanced CDN servers. i.e. the
traffic going to the CDNs is unfairly skewed towards one or more CDN servers,
causing them to serve content _to all users of all networks_ more slowly. By
explicitly avoiding said CDNs which are slow on _Google's_ end, you will use a
different, less-pounded CDN that can serve your content faster.

Note that I am not even a TW user (Comcast here), but this lynch mob is
getting out of control. I expect a higher understanding of basic network
principles when I browse HN, and "I can't load YouTube quickly so this means
my ISP is shaping my bandwidth, and I need not look for actual evidence to
support this claim" does not qualify as such.

That said, yes, it is possible for a cunning ISP to shape your traffic by
purposely mis-directing CDN selection, for example, making it so that all
their users end up at the same exit (slow) node when contacting a YouTube IP
as such effectively YouTube into serving all their content to all the ISP's
users from the same CDN node(s), resulting in poor connection. The way to test
this would be to map out the routes for packets sent all over, and search for
statistically-significant routing anomalies when attempting to pass packets on
to Google's network from within a certain ISP.

The CDN you use is often selected off a DNS response for many networks. An
easy way to select a different CDN (that may adversely affect your browsing
speed due to geo-origination!) would be to use a different DNS server (make
sure to flush the DNS cache in your OS and in your browser). This is why it's
not advised to use non-ISP DNS such as Google DNS, OpenDNS, etc) unless
they're both a) anycast (basically CDN for DNS, your DNS query will go to the
nearest geographic location to you) and b) have enough servers distributed
around the country so that your anycast DNS request will be resolved near you,
so that the CDN based off of DNS will also be physically near you. You can use
namebench [0] by Google to query the fastest DNS servers, typically faster
means closer as hops then physical distance are the biggest factors in DNS
speed, though a shitty DNS server will obviously skew those results.

0: <https://code.google.com/p/namebench/>

~~~
mbell
> The CDN you use when accessing YouTube, et. al. depends on the route you
> take. The first/nearest CDN to you is (usually, depending on the CDN owner's
> configuration) the one that will be used.

Just load a few videos in youtube with the chrome network tab from dev tools
open, you'll very commonly see a CDN request returning a redirect to another
CDN, 4-5 redirects isn't uncommon before the video plays.

Assuming that CDN selection is purely geographical or route based is just as
poor an assumption as your accusing others of.

~~~
ComputerGuru
> Assuming that CDN selection is purely geographical or route based is just as
> poor an assumption as your accusing others of.

As you yourself quoted, I used the word "usually." That directly and
explicitly implies "not purely."

The CDN you use depends on many factors. Nearness to your route/physical
location is a big factor. The relative power/bandwidth of each CDN server is
another factor (weighted distribution). Internal network factors also
contribute to the decision, as does maintenance, BGP peering, random load
distribution, and current network health/status.

~~~
Reebz
Thanks for the detailed comment above. As I said earlier, I'm no networking
guy! However, before posting I did test on a friend's Verizon FiOS connection,
my own Verizon Mobile Hotspot, and also the various message boards I read
complaining about speed appeared to be overwhelmingly TWC. I do understand
that's not ideal proof. This was just intended to be a share of a quick fix.

Any suggestion to make my blog post more technically sound, I'm all ears! I
can't seem to find a conclusion in all the HN comments except that "it could
be a bunch of stuff going wrong", and to be honest, I don't have the expertise
to find said conclusion.

~~~
ComputerGuru
The criticism was not leveled at you in particular, thank you for your
willingness to revisit your assumptions. You need to test the connection to
the same CDN node from a different ISP. Get the final URL for the video and
try it on the other PC, and time the download for comparison. Make sure the
CDN does not force a redirect to a different node.

You can get that kind of info from Chrome's "Resources" tab in the dev console
(or the equivalent in whatever browser you are using). You should run the test
several times to avoid warm/cold cache along the way. Should the results
significantly differ, you should also note the traceroute/tracert results to
the final hop.

You can try these ready-made tests from Glasnost, but they do not cover all
cases: <http://broadband.mpi-sws.org/transparency/bttest.php>

------
shmerl
Why are they doing it in the first place? It's a good reason to dump such ISP
IMHO.

~~~
epistasis
Being able to dump the ISP would require a marketplace of ISPs to choose from.
However, in the US, regulatory capture has prevented such a marketplace from
forming.

~~~
shmerl
Is this regulatory capture still in force? And if not, what prevents them from
forming now?

~~~
epistasis
Yes, typically cable companies have been granted monopolies within a
municipality. In municipalities where cable companies have refused to upgrade
infrastructure, and municipalities have attempted to build out fiber
infrastructure to homes, cable companies have used the courts to delay
movement by the municipality. Cable companies have also been pushing through
laws on the state level to prevent municipalities from ever building out their
own data infrastructure.

~~~
epistasis
Turns out that I'm wrong on the municipal monopoly, that was changed in 1992
[1], and I was mistakenly perpetuating a common misconception.

[1] [http://www.muninetworks.org/content/cable-monopoly-result-
pr...](http://www.muninetworks.org/content/cable-monopoly-result-private-
sector-not-public)

------
aba_sababa
Brooklyn here.

..let's just say that if the author ever comes to Brooklyn, he will not leave
sober. This is incredible.

------
EricBurnett
This could actually be due to DNS, rather than anything particular to that
edge-cache/CDN. Resolvers that aren't actually close to you (network-wise)
could cause problems like this, or TWC partitioning their network in a way
that causes geographically diverse locations to get lumped together, etc. In
essence you'd be talking to edge-caches on the _wrong edge_ , so to speak.

To test: try a different DNS resolver, and see if you start getting faster
video loads. If you're using TWC's local resolver, try 8.8.8.8 (run by
Google); if you're using Google's already try the local resolver and/or
OpenDNS (208.67.222.222).

If that does work as well, I'd recommend it over the heavy-handed approach of
blocking arbitrary netblocks. Especially since that second netblock listed
isn't owned by Google, and so you could be collaterally blocking other content
that you still want.

(Disclaimer: I work for Google, but in Ads, not anything network or YouTube
related).

~~~
georgefox
I'm a TWC customer, and I used to have consistently horrible YouTube speeds. I
eventually got sick of it and read somewhere to try different DNS, as you
suggested. I switched from TWC's DNS to OpenDNS probably around a year ago,
and YouTube did become faster. It's less consistent now, sometimes loading
nicely and sometimes slowly. youtube.com/my_speed claims I'm averaging 7.6
Mbps vs. the average 5.2 for my ISP and 6.4 for the region. I see occasional
traffic from 206.111.0.0/16, but it seems to be coming largely from
74.125.0.0/16 and 173.194.0.0/16.

------
Reebz
Based on the discussion here at HN, I've updated the title in my blog post to
call out "ISPs" generically and not TWC specifically. I felt I did my due
diligence sufficiently before crafting my title, but as we know, a sample of
one is not statistically significant!

------
bane
Fios user here. I'm travelling right now so I can't test. But youtube has been
consistently poor for months now. Even 240p is unusable in many cases.

Interestingly, I get consistently the best performance from 360p and 1080 with
the rest giving absurdly unusable streaming speeds. Not great, but servicable
if i go get some coffee while buffers. I wonder if the different resolutions
are being served up from different CDNs?

Anybody try this on fios and find improvements?

(btw my wife gets better streaming performance than i do on youtube from
various video streaming sites in asia and i'd bet a dollar i live within 10
miles of a google data center. The google forums are on fire with complaints)

------
megaframe
I haven't tried this out.

I have noticed some serious throttling on from Comcast for Youtube as of late.

I can tell because directly viewing youtube gets throttled about 2min in (so
they pick up on it about 2min in, regardless of where I start watching the
video). If I VPN to work I can watch the same video no throttle, and still
have bandwidth to spare.

It's the same bottle neck, Comcast, and work is down the road from me on their
own dedicated fiber, it's adding 4 hops and it actually runs faster. (and I
checked the IPs, I'm connecting to the same youtube servers as far as I can
tell)

------
codva
I have this same problem with Comcast. I'm going to try this.

~~~
avree
I can't tell if this is placebo or not, but my YouTube was loading extremely
slowly pre-fix (on Comcast) and now is zipping along quickly.

~~~
salemh
Another anecdotal "yes" seems to be working much faster for me. Versus
skipping, slow load times, random freezes, and, impossible to play any
youtubes in HD quality at all. Now, I can stream them. I've had many friends
around me complaining about YouTube quality as of late, so interesting
thread/discussion and quick-fixes.

------
nl
Related: I have a Samsung Smart TV, which has a number of video apps including
(Australian) ABC iView

The performance I was getting was terrible - much much worse than any other
device on my home network.

Turned out it was because I was using the Google DNS servers for the TV, and
that was screwing it up.

The ABC iView app uses Akamai, which doesn't use the new DNS extensions to
pass through the location of the client computer.

Changed DNS server and everything was good again.

~~~
chii
interesting that using google's dns server isn't going to make things faster.
I also noticed youtube was slower for me recently, and I do use google's dns.
Let me switch back to my isp's dns and see if it makes any difference.

------
Aco-
TWC customer from NYC here.

I tried adding the ip ranges in article and it rendered youtube inoperable for
me. No matter what quality setting I used nothing would stream. Removed the
rules and youtube streamed again, albeit slow as ever (still cant stream 720 &
1080)

I can't stand this ISP and I have no alternative available to me here. Talk
about living in misery.

~~~
trustfundbaby
I had a similar problem, it looked like it wouldn't stream, but it actually
just took a long time to start, once it did, it buffered very very quickly.
but that delay was a killer. had to delete the rules after a couple of videos

------
mbell
On Comcast (Boston area) most videos are coming from 208.117.0.0/16 (ish)
although some coming from the mentioned blocks.

Interestingly for me the domain the videos are coming from are all of the same
general form:

> r1.sn-jvhj5nu-p5qd.c.youtube.com (where the bit before c.youtube.com varies)

Where as the reddit discussion has domains of the form:

> o-o---preferred---sn-mv-p5qe---v17---lscache1.c.youtube.com

The inclusion of the 'preferred' and 'cache' bit are somewhat interesting.

I did find that if I block 208.117.0.0/16 as well as the other two mentions
blocks (173.194.55.0/24, 206.111.0.0/16) then no youtube videos will load at
all.

I would venture a guess that blocking the mentioned ranges is just forcing you
to the 208.117.0.0/16 CDN.

------
pragone
Can anyone explain what these IPs refer to? YouTube CDNs? Some commercial
service?

~~~
birken
If you want to know about a particular IP allocation, whois will help you out

$ whois 173.194.55.0

I won't include the whole output, but here is the link of the allocation:
<http://whois.arin.net/rest/net/NET-173-194-0-0-1>

Basically, this listed IP block is part of a much larger allocation for
Google. I don't know exactly what type of google service is hosted from it,
but it isn't a commercial CDN.

------
csense
Given how big an ISP Time Warner is, wouldn't the CDN and/or Google eventually
notice the slow responses from their end and start playing a game of cat-and-
mouse rotating IP addresses in and out of service as proxies?

------
jdlegg
Verizon FIOS has the same sort of behavior.

~~~
tmoertel
My FiOS service has this problem as well. If the problem isn't isolated to
TWC, what's really causing it?

~~~
neurotech1
Inefficient or misconfigured routing/peering between the ISP and the CDN.

------
spydum
Isn't it more likely that those CDN hosts are just overloaded or there are
natural throughput limits somewhere between those networks? If TWC wanted to
QoS YouTube, why not cover all the ranges?

------
dfc
Its too bad this breaks youtube-dl. I found a series of videos on youtube that
revolutionized the way I do drywall and I can remember waiting forever for
youtube-dl to grab the entire playlist.

~~~
Wistar
Can you share the titles?

~~~
dfc
DryWallGall: <https://www.youtube.com/user/drywallgall/videos>

The gentleman in the video is Laurier. I sent him a message on FB thanking him
for the videos, he is extremely friendly. There is actually a neat story
behind the videos. The current playlist is slightly different than the
original set. A while back someone paid him to take the original series
offline for six months (under the theory that they were too helpful). Laurier
took him up on his offer and when he put them back online the playlist was
slightly different but still remarkably helpful. _I am an order of magnitude
faster now when I rock a room._ The biggest change for me was using the
concrete trowel instead of the normal 4/6/12 inch mud knife. That being said I
did pick up a number of tips from all of the videos. The only thing I cannot
do is freehand cuts with a tape measure and a blade, I still use the T.

I would suggest watching the entire playlist once before your next project
starts and then watch the relevant video before each step as a refresher. I
used to dread any project that involved drywall. When I do "habitat for
humantiy"-esque projects now I try my hardest to be on the rocking team.

EDIT:

If you are skeptical about watching all the videos my big ah-ha moment came
when I understood "mud control." This is a nice example:

<http://youtu.be/kPIIWGqzmRw?t=3m6s>

------
cygni
I'm on FiOS and have also been suffering through terribly slow speeds with
YouTube and Twitch.tv. I found that discussion on Reddit about a week ago, and
it did temporarily fix my problem. However, after a day or so I noticed my
speeds went back down to a crawl.

I also experienced this temporary speed increase (from barely streaming 240p
to getting smooth 1080p) if I switched locales (adding "&gl=CA" to the end of
the URL) or switched to HTTPS.

------
p1mrx
My "IPvFoo" Chrome extension will show you which IP the video is streaming
from:

<http://ipvfoo.googlecode.com/>

------
bcardarella
I can confirm that this works well for Verizon FIOS as well. Youtube has been
terrible on FIOS the past few months and getting worse.

~~~
bro7861
Could you or someone else provide a detailed process of how to go ahead in
implementing these protocols on a standard fios router?

------
jasonzemos
I've found using youtube over HTTPS is the best defense against an ISP's poor
caching and traffic shaping.

~~~
nivla
Could have worked but sadly Youtube only streams videos under http. :(

------
jonathanjaeger
How do I get Time Warner to start working in the first place? I bought a
FreedomPop device just to get 4G wifi for the last month waiting for Time
Warner to just fix our Internet (already had 3 separate appointments..). But
glad to hear I'm going to have YouTube issues regardless..

------
trotsky
netflix is ~25% of primetime volume youtube is ~12% of primetime volume

netflix has an ARPU of $8/mo youtube is probably lucky to have an ARPU of
$0.25

netflix pays for transit from multiple t1's with dozens of pops

google traffic is 99% settlement free

it's almost seems like good video delivery must cost money or something.

when you peer with google you have to agree to offer all your routes at all
peering points, they make an effort to do local delivery but its always best
effort.

strangely, i never have a single glitch with netflix even though it always
runs 6mbit, but i drop out on 240p often on youtube - this is verizon fios.

this whole experience is almost guaranteed to be google saving money or
oversubscribing their regional cache boxes.

when you block certain class c's or b's you're just steering away from their
cdn and hitting their primaries.

------
ineedtosleep
Noticed this from TWC somewhat recently as well when I realized that I was
taking out my phone to watch YouTube videos more frequently (on 3G/4G). Now, I
just keep my computers on a VPN as much as possible and there's a number of
sites that just feel faster.

------
phryk
<http://npaste.de/p/Cb/> Snippet for the pf firewall. You might have to place
the 'block' rule after all 'pass' rules if you use inclusive firewalling…

------
uptown
If I should decide I wanted to undo this, what's the syntax later on?

~~~
deefour
You can run

ipfw delete ____

where ____ is the id of the firewall entry.

~~~
snprbob86
To clarify, `ifpw list` prints a table of rules where the first column
contains rule ID numbers. Use `ipfw del $id`.

------
jaequery
the videos/screenshots loads a lot slower after applying the fw rules.
especially the thumbnails on the video page on the right side, takes forever
to load. anyone else see the same?

~~~
delinka
This is going to be dependent on your location within the network. I'd never
assume advice like this will work just anywhere on the planet, let alone
within a large country. It certainly does provide a data point for the problem
and a localized solution that can be generalized by those with more expertise.
This author admits limited expertise with "Other people can dive into the
complexity much better than I ever could, but that’s the overall theme."

------
regnum
I followed the steps in the article and it has messed up my YouTube to where
it is delayed by about 15 seconds in loading videos.

------
AinsophaurS
Any help how to do this for a Linksys E4200 router with regular firmware?

------
cloudwalking
Net neutrality is a myth :(

------
rcthompson
I wonder if this affects Hulu as well.

------
drivebyacct2
This is abhorrent. We need more ISP competition. Bring it Google. Or
municipalities. Or anyone, please.

------
rorrr
I'm with TWC, and holy crap, now 1080p quality works just fine, whereas most
of the time 720p would take forever to buffer. I'm on a 20/2 mbit plan, and it
was ridiculous before this fix.

------
largesse
Technically, doing this is a DMCA violation, right?

~~~
dangrossman
The DMCA modernized copyright law for the digital age, creating protections
for network providers against infringement by their users, and making illegal
circumvention of new digital copyright enforcement schemes. What part of this
act do you think applies to throttling network connections, if that's what's
happening here?

~~~
largesse
How then is unlocking a cellphone a violation of a copyright enforcement
scheme?

~~~
dangrossman
That's a separate discussion and a complex topic. A starting point if you're
interested: <https://www.eff.org/my/node/55941>

