No replies to this topic

[tnctx02]

BROADBAND customers of Australia's largest ISPs can use peer-to-peer file-sharing services such as BitTorrent and Kazaa without being throttled by their ISP, at least for now.

ISPs
Clutter buster: Michael Malone says it is an ISP's role to make sure the network runs smoothly regardless of the nature of the data Picture: Colin Murty
Australia's largest internet providers say they are not limiting peer-to-peer file sharing traffic on their networks and have no immediate plans to impose restrictions on the activity.

However, some say they have the means to apply limits if that is required in the future.

Internet suppliers recently revealed that file-sharing traffic is restricted on two of Australia's best-known dedicated wireless data networks.

This prompted fears of the practice being adopted more widely.

Unwired, which markets its portable service to students, confirmed that it limited peer-to-peer traffic on some parts of its network to smooth the flow of data that it classes as real-time.

Two iBurst resellers, Independent Service Providers and BigAir, have defended the practice of prioritising some forms of internet traffic.

Australia's top three broadband providers, Telstra, Optus and iiNet say they don't differentiate between peer-to-peer and other forms of internet traffic.

"Telstra does not shape file sharing traffic," a Telstra spokesman says.

The only shaping Telstra does is to accounts that have gone over 10GB in a month, he says.

IiNet managing director Michael Malone said internet providers needed to ensure their networks were free of congestion, rather than differentiate between types of traffic.

IBurst and Unwired were trying to reduce their bandwidth bills, he said.

Peer-to-peer use was targeted because it was likely to involve "dodgy" activity, he said.

"From our point of view, if you tell a customer you're getting 2GB of downloads during the month, that's what we need to supply," he said.

Optus said it had the technical means to prioritise traffic on its network but that it would only use the technology in emergencies or "some other unforeseeable circumstance".

IBurst reseller Pacific Internet said fixed-line internet pricing plans were more appropriate than wireless plans for peer-to-peer users.

Broadband users are divided on the practice.

One broadband user who asked not to be named said deprioritisation of traffic was a reasonable way of addressing network congestion problems.

"Deprioritisation should be applied to applications that can tolerate reduced throughput and increased response times, including P2P," he said.

IBurst user Boyd Chan said ISPs should only use traffic prioritisation when it was "absolutely necessary".

"ISPs should be geared up with the necessary backhaul to support whatever amount of data at whatever time of the day to support their users," Mr Chan said.

Some ISPs are sceptical that limiting peer-to-peer file sharing traffic was feasible from a technical standpoint.

"It's technically very dodgy to do," Mr Malone said.