Telco/ISP

Exetel plans to ban P2P during off-peak period

"I totally agree with the above posters. The users are just using what they bought and are paying for. When will ISP's get it into their tiny little minds that they need to think a bit harder ..."

By Digger11

Background: Film industry vs ISP iiNet

Day 22: Film studios target iiNet business model change

Revealed: iiNet's film copyright defence

Update: iiNet copyright case decision next week

Breaking Stories

Microsoft denies Windows 7 battery problems

Ex-Intel executive owns up to insider trading

Optus to boost HFC network up to 100 Mbps

Microsoft launches Surface, unveils partners and customers

Opinion: Webjet brings 'cloud' claims back down to earth

By Ben Grubb

Aug 5, 2009 1:25 PM

Downloaders costing Exetel $150,000 a month.

Internet Service Provider Exetel is considering a ban on peer-to-peer network traffic during the first two hours of its 'off-peak' period, should users continue to set their P2P downloads to go off at the very second the provider's off-peak period starts.

Exetel chief John Linton said he will place a ban on P2P network traffic during the first two hours of the provider's midnight to noon off-peak period if a user "elects to make that an off-peak period".

Users would also be given the choice to nominate the two-hour period as "peak", retaining access to peer-to-peer but paying higher rates for it.

"The penalty for selecting that period as 'free' and then using it for P2P downloads will be the removal of the free period completely for that customer or termination of the service." Linton said on his personal blog.

The company will start its off-peak period at 2am instead of midnight "because we could never find a way of dealing with a relatively very small number of user's obduracy and senselessness," Linton said.

"For well over five years we have been trying to find ways of giving Exetel customers the maximum 'free' download allowances, over the longest possible period, for the lowest possible monthly cost without sending ourselves broke," he said.

"For well over five years we have spent more and more money buying more bandwidth than we needed to try and meet an ever higher end user.

Linton said Exetel's user base insist on starting to download over P2P networks at "one second past midnight EVERY night". He also claimed that for over 90 percent of those users, "their downloads were completed by 12.30 am EVERY morning."

This meant that the company had to purchase more bandwidth to cope with the influx of users at 12:01am.

He estimated the off-peak period to cost the company $150,000 in bandwidth a month.

Linton said Exetel would bring back the midnight to midday off-peak period in November.

He also planned to bring in the ban on P2P if users abuse the Exetel network during the off-peak period.

Comments: 15

Thoughts on this article? Add a comment below.

Chicken Lips Aug 5, 2009 2:28 PM	Interesting interpretation / spin. I read the blog and he seemed to be saying that the 'dead' bandwidth cost $150,000 therefore they may as well give it away as 'off peak' data.
bengrubb Aug 5, 2009 2:36 PM	@Chicken Lips Linton was more than happy to provide the existing 'dead' bandwidth to these customers. Thing is, he was providing that 'dead' bandwidth plus more (that needed to be purchased) because people were apparently abusing the offering.
djzort Aug 5, 2009 4:37 PM	ultimately the goal of peak and offpeak plans is to present an apparent increase in plan value, by providing greater traffic privileges to customers during low utilisation periods. this increase in value is theoretically free to the ISP as the network is spec'd out to cope with the higer usage during other periods during the day. so clearly if traffic is spiking during this 'off peak' period, its actually 'peak' and not 'off-peak'. so rather than overselling unused throughput, the ISP is having to buy more. banning p2p in off peak is a pretty quick way to shed customers IMO. blocking p2p for the first hours will just shift the flood to 1 minute after that time, as people just change the time on their automated downloading application. my suggestion would be to shift peak and off-peak times to actually match peak and off peak network utilisation.
DanielBrown Aug 5, 2009 4:43 PM	Users are not abusing Exetel! They paid for the service and if needs to , are allowed to use their entire quota each month. Extel should not over subscribe their network and allow for capacity for user to use what they pay for! Sorry Extel, but you offer this as a service and people are using it, you can’t cry foul if you failed to get the correct bandwidth! No, I’m not an Extel Customer
HyRax Aug 5, 2009 4:58 PM	djzort makes an excellent point: "off-peak" really IS peak time as far as bandwidth demand goes. Since people choose to use their off-peak period to do all their P2P so as not to impact their on-peak allowance, wouldn't the obvious solution be to reduce the off-peak quota and increase the on-peak quota? Maybe even make them identical? This will more readily prompt people to spread their P2P traffic throughout the day and not just do it all simultaneously at the same start time. Another option would be to modify the previous concept Exetel brought forward with regards to the start/end times being user-customisable from "12 to 12" to "2 to 2". Why not split the customer base in two and allocate customers a pre-determined off-peak "shift"? ie: Customer A, B and C will have their peak period from 12 to 12 and customers D, E and F will have their off-peak period from 2 to 2 instead. This guarantees that the entire customer base won't be starting all their P2P at exactly the same time, especially if it's true that the majority of downloaders finish the bulk of their downloads within 30 minutes of the start of peak-time. Such a solution should better cater for the customer's right to use what they have paid for and address Exetel's high bandwidth demand woes.
BrettWinterford Aug 5, 2009 5:35 PM	HyRax that's a great idea. I challenge an ISP to implement it!
bengrubb Aug 5, 2009 5:40 PM	HyRax, I love that idea also! It would make for tricky advertising but I'm sure Exetel's target market would get it.
Sams Aug 5, 2009 7:18 PM	Efficiently using the service that you paid for is not "abuse". If Exetel has under-dimensioned/funded its plans then it has only itself to blame, and should adjust is plan fees accordingly, not ban users.
peterh_oz Aug 5, 2009 11:34 PM	The problem is not that people are using their downloads - the problem is that everyone is starting their downloads at the same minute of the day (midnight). Roads are built for a certain number of cars, but if EVERY car drove on the SAME road at the SAME minute, it can't work. So Exetel has moved peak back to 2am, so that general surfers aren't impacted at midnight by the big downloaders (most of whom have finished in 30 mins). No big deal. And today John said that IF they allow people to choose midnight as a start then would be for non-P2P downloads. Not iTunes podcasts etc, just the big Linux downloads etc. If you want to run them in offpeak, they can continue to start at 2am. Your story explains this (sort of, but not very well) - but your heading is quite misleading!
cw Aug 6, 2009 12:03 AM	What a clown Linton is, he offers split quota plans then whines when customers use the plans ina way that suits them. If he wants to fix the "problem" the answer is simple, do not artificially create the demand for bandwidth by offering peak vs offpeak style plans.
NumbNuts2009 Aug 6, 2009 3:47 PM	"their downloads were completed by 12.30 am EVERY morning." Does he believe readers to be morons? That's only 285MB on '1500' ADSL, the most common fast speed. What the heck does 285MB get you - Nothing. And it doesn't break the bank either. "Don't hate the player, hate the game." Do whatever you need to, to keep it all running. Stagger times, adjust times, adjust plan-styles. But quit passing the buck at random users for using what they bought.
t3h Aug 6, 2009 9:26 PM	Is it _really_ this complicated? If people are actually USING the quota you offered to sell them, how about you offer sustainable plans? Is it really that hard? If it's costing you $150k/month, then it is not sustainable and you should not have offered it to your customers. Not even Telstra treats their customers with such contempt...
pstead Aug 11, 2009 5:57 PM	The problem isn't the user because they are given-for a price-a download limit, and if they execed that limit; the user pays, or has bandwith restrictions placed on them. Why then should a user be banned for 2 hours or elect to use it as peak. I haven't used all my quota as yet, but I can becuse I pay for it.
dnr Aug 13, 2009 2:42 PM	cw put it well. Clown. I'd have serious doubts about sticking with any isp that hates its customers for using what they paid for, when they're told to.
Digger11 Oct 28, 2009 4:44 PM	I totally agree with the above posters. The users are just using what they bought and are paying for. When will ISP's get it into their tiny little minds that they need to think a bit harder before offering unlimited this or off-peak that. They blame their customers for their own companies lack of financial or marketing nouse. I remember when Smorgy's launched unlimited meals in Australia and complained that a) the people who turned up ate too much! and b) they all wanted to eat between 6 p.m. and 8 p.m. Total Morons really. Do your business planning and if you get it wrong - stop blaming the customers. But maybe that is their business plan (as Linton is certainly no fool), get the customers to sign up under false pretences, well knowing that not many of them will leave when you restrict their usage - could be a masterplan !!!!.