10 replies to this topic

[waterfall]

What do you think of this? Can AirVPN defeat throttling? How about if comcast sets up a 'whitelist' and airVPN is not on it? 

 

<><><><>

So in simple terms what a VPN would do is tunnel all your traffic via their servers so your ISP can see that you're using bandwidth, but not what/why/how or any specifics; and the VPN should not see/log any of what you're doing either.

Which is why users tend to not use a VPN that's released through a telecom company since it defeats the purpose.

Coming to your specific question, a VPN should, in theory, be able to bypass throttling on certain sites (should net neutrality be reversed), but there are times where ISPs have identified a VPN's servers/IPs/ports and blocked them. This is usually in countries with aggressive governmental censorships. If you're not paying for a "package" with sites included, a VPN should still allow you to treat all sites equally and not affect their speed/access, but do keep latency etc.

So its best to use a VPN that constantly rotates IPs, doesn't offer StaticIP, and enforces strict encryption with no snooping/logging. With all of those - yes, using a VPN should leave you relatively unscathed on net-neutrality reversal since there wouldn't/shouldn't be speed throttling or site blocking.

<><><>><>

[go558a83nk]

VPN traffic will be throttled, because it's VPN traffic, not because they can see what site or service you're accessing.

 

I'm not looking forward to the future and usually I'm quite conservative. 

[larky]

why does everyone think that if net neutrality is repealed (and survives that repeal) that suddenly VPN's will be blocked or "throttled" by US ISP's?

 

When net neutrality was enacted there was nothing in that net neutrality which prevented VPN's from being blocked or "throttled" by US ISP's. Before net neutrality there was nothing that kept VPN's from being blocked or "throttled" by US ISP's. Likewise, there is nothing with repealing net neutrality from keeping VPN's from being blocked or "throttled" by US ISP's. In other words its basically paranoia that makes people think net neutrality repeal might let by US ISP's block or "throttle" VPN's, and it simply is not true. US ISP's have always been free to do this, such capability was even included and encompassed in net neutrality when it was enacted by allowing ISP's reasonable 'network management' practices which has always included blocking or "throttling" customers "services or uses" not consistent with the ISP network practices and intended uses.

 

There is absolutely zero evidence that US ISP's will start blocking or "throttling" its customers VPN usage as a result of a net neutrality repeal. The paranoia that US ISP's will start blocking or "throttling" its customers VPN usage as a result of net neutrality repeal is not warranted and is not based in any foundation of fact. If it does eventually happen it will not be because of a net neutrality repeal.

 

The FCC's net neutrality thing has never applied to anyone outside the US, the jurisdiction simply is not there to do so.

[Tommie]

The FCC's net neutrality thing has never applied to anyone outside the US, the jurisdiction simply is not there to do so.

 

If you're speaking as purely a legal issue then yes, the US has no legal jurisdiction to impose its FCC rules on other nations. But from a practical standpoint the new rules, just like the old rules, have to be carefully considered by any foreign ISP when it comes to content delivery to its customers of US-origin content. Canadian ISPs are already anticipating how the new rules will impact their customer base, and they're very concerned about US carriers tacking on additional priority delivery fees.

[zhang888]

This would be really helpful for the community if some members who are affected by this could upload their speed test results

with regular connection (no VPN), VPN over standard ports, and VPN over an SSL tunnel which is hard to throttle/control.

Then this topic could be a potential help for anyone using Comcast? or whatever providers in the US who decided to discriminate traffic.

[DonaldDrumpf]

why does everyone think that if net neutrality is repealed (and survives that repeal) that suddenly VPN's will be blocked or "throttled" by US ISP's?

 

When net neutrality was enacted there was nothing in that net neutrality which prevented VPN's from being blocked or "throttled" by US ISP's. Before net neutrality there was nothing that kept VPN's from being blocked or "throttled" by US ISP's. Likewise, there is nothing with repealing net neutrality from keeping VPN's from being blocked or "throttled" by US ISP's. In other words its basically paranoia that makes people think net neutrality repeal might let by US ISP's block or "throttle" VPN's, and it simply is not true. US ISP's have always been free to do this, such capability was even included and encompassed in net neutrality when it was enacted by allowing ISP's reasonable 'network management' practices which has always included blocking or "throttling" customers "services or uses" not consistent with the ISP network practices and intended uses.

 

There is absolutely zero evidence that US ISP's will start blocking or "throttling" its customers VPN usage as a result of a net neutrality repeal. The paranoia that US ISP's will start blocking or "throttling" its customers VPN usage as a result of net neutrality repeal is not warranted and is not based in any foundation of fact. If it does eventually happen it will not be because of a net neutrality repeal.

 

The FCC's net neutrality thing has never applied to anyone outside the US, the jurisdiction simply is not there to do so.

 

ISPs were just recently given the green light to sell their customers' browsing habits and data. Thus, they were only recently provided an incentive to block or throttle VPN traffic as it poses an impediment to the collection of now valuable customer data.  

 

I'm curious as to how they could, under net neutrality, justify blocking VPN traffic as being "inconsistent with their intended uses" or "network practices".. That's a legal stretch if I ever heard one.

 

This "paranoia" is more than warranted by their past practices and their proven eagerness to exploit any opportunity for profit.

 

In the past, ISP's have been discovered throttling and blocking torrent traffic and traffic to websites sympathetic to the union they were negotiating with. Don't for one minute think that they won't throttle or block at will anything holding the potential to negatively influence their bottom line.  

 

That said, none of this will happen "suddenly".  It'll happen gradually as people forget their current "who us?" protestations and denials and they slowly and methodically proceed to turn the internet into a glorified version of cable TV.

 

Oh, and other countries outside the U.S. have no analog to net neutrality, which is why many of their citizens have to buy their service "al a carte" like a cable subscription. When ISP's start discriminating on the basis of profit or political palatability, jurisdictional issues become irrelevant. 

 

Do you work for an ISP by any chance?

[larky]

why does everyone think that if net neutrality is repealed (and survives that repeal) that suddenly VPN's will be blocked or "throttled" by US ISP's?

 

When net neutrality was enacted there was nothing in that net neutrality which prevented VPN's from being blocked or "throttled" by US ISP's. Before net neutrality there was nothing that kept VPN's from being blocked or "throttled" by US ISP's. Likewise, there is nothing with repealing net neutrality from keeping VPN's from being blocked or "throttled" by US ISP's. In other words its basically paranoia that makes people think net neutrality repeal might let by US ISP's block or "throttle" VPN's, and it simply is not true. US ISP's have always been free to do this, such capability was even included and encompassed in net neutrality when it was enacted by allowing ISP's reasonable 'network management' practices which has always included blocking or "throttling" customers "services or uses" not consistent with the ISP network practices and intended uses.

 

There is absolutely zero evidence that US ISP's will start blocking or "throttling" its customers VPN usage as a result of a net neutrality repeal. The paranoia that US ISP's will start blocking or "throttling" its customers VPN usage as a result of net neutrality repeal is not warranted and is not based in any foundation of fact. If it does eventually happen it will not be because of a net neutrality repeal.

 

The FCC's net neutrality thing has never applied to anyone outside the US, the jurisdiction simply is not there to do so.

 

ISPs were just recently given the green light to sell their customers' browsing habits and data. Thus, they were only recently provided an incentive to block or throttle VPN traffic as it poses an impediment to the collection of now valuable customer data.  

 

I'm curious as to how they could, under net neutrality, justify blocking VPN traffic as being "inconsistent with their intended uses" or "network practices".. That's a legal stretch if I ever heard one.

 

This "paranoia" is more than warranted by their past practices and their proven eagerness to exploit any opportunity for profit.

 

In the past, ISP's have been discovered throttling and blocking torrent traffic and traffic to websites sympathetic to the union they were negotiating with. Don't for one minute think that they won't throttle or block at will anything holding the potential to negatively influence their bottom line.  

 

That said, none of this will happen "suddenly".  It'll happen gradually as people forget their current "who us?" protestations and denials and they slowly and methodically proceed to turn the internet into a glorified version of cable TV.

 

Oh, and other countries outside the U.S. have no analog to net neutrality, which is why many of their citizens have to buy their service "al a carte" like a cable subscription. When ISP's start discriminating on the basis of profit or political palatability, jurisdictional issues become irrelevant. 

 

Do you work for an ISP by any chance?

 

Your post was spread across different subject matter points trying to tie them together in some weird fashion like one always equals the other. The main thing I got from it was the fear of blocking or throttling sites or applications use (i.e. torrent). So i'll reply to that in context with the threads key point the OP was concerned about like I did in my other post to which you replied with this, so as to stay strictly on topic.

 

Repeal of Net Neutrality does not give U.S. ISP's carte blanch to block or throttle VPN services, among some other things it allows them to do what they wanted to do and were doing prior to Net Neutrality being enacted which is "prioritize" things, for example, steaming video services, for pay.

 

U.S. ISP's blocking/throttling torrent traffic and supposedly websites are not the same as blocking/throttling VPN use. Simply because one can not reach a web site or use bittorrent on VPN does not mean that a VPN service use has been throttled or blocked.

 

The OP posted: "What do you think of this? Can AirVPN defeat throttling? How about if comcast sets up a 'whitelist' and airVPN is not on it?" as his key point concern. That is what I replied to exactly on topic for his key point concern.

 

I don't understand the vague accusatory sounding reference question asking "Do you work for an ISP by any chance?" Why would you think I work for an ISP? I don't, on occasion the company I work for does contract with IPS's for various things and its not a secret, if I get assigned the job I do it cause ya know...gotta make a living cause I like the simple things like eating, and electricity, etc..... I simply posted,overall, the fact that there is no evidence to support the OP's original key point concern. Now you seem to want to slice n' dice what I posted into other areas out of its intended context.

 

My post was neither for or against. It was simply the fact that there is zero evidence to support that U.S. ISP's will block or throttle VPN service use as a result of a repeal of Net Neutrality and the paranoia about such is unwarranted.

 

Imagining something might happen is not the same as it actually happening. You post as though U.S. ISP's will block or throttle VPN service use as a result of a Net Neutrality repeal. The paranoia that U.S. ISP's will block or throttle VPN service use as a result of a Net Neutrality repeal is simply not supported by any evidence what so ever.

 

If you can point to something which factually shows evidence a U.S. ISP has (or will) blocked or throttled a VPN service use as a result of Net Neutrality repeal please post that information.

 

When I posted "inconsistent with their intended uses" or "network practices" its not a "legal stretch", I was referring to uses of VPN's (for example bit torrenting movies) not VPN services use its self. A premise to which one agrees, since the OP mentioned Comcast, in the Comcast terms of service. This ability, like I originally posted, has been allowed ISP's all the time, before Net Neutrality, during net Neutrality, and will be the same after Net Neutrality, If an ISP user is found to have violated those terms of service using VPN then its possible that method of use (the VPN use) could be blocked in some way - but this has nothing at all to do with Net Neutrality and is a violation of the terms of service.

[waterfall]

Thanks for all this great dialogue about potential changes to how USians interact with the Net. I feigned some ignorance of NN and protocols to get the discussion started, and I do feel that the telecoms are going to attempt to reshape the Internet as a 'glorified version of cable TV'. My concerns are not necessarily limited to torrents or Netflix streaming but to access grassroots sites that are politically challenging the status quo and large corps, and research databases on arcane subjects like 15th century Renaissance literature. 

 

At this point, life in the US seems to be on a clear trajectory downward, in terms of rationality and quality-of-llfe, as well as public ownership of tax-funded infrastructure (the airwaves and her carriers), and public participation. I find that legitimate VPNs like AirVPN are now more essential than ever. Yet, I am sad to predict that access to information may be displaced, and marginalized, by pre-digested infotainment with a brand logo that punches and pops.

 

If the telecoms do throttle VPNs I guess I'll just go with the lowest cost, and probably slowest, provider available in the monopoly, reverting back to the 'world wide wait' we made fun of back in the 90s.

[Roadblock4]

I believe V3rlz0n is throttling my vpn traffic already.  Slow Slow speeds, almost unusable.  Just a Heads up

[Roadblock4]

I believe V3rlz0n is throttling my vpn traffic already.  Slow Slow speeds, almost unusable.  Just a Heads up

[monstrocity]

As consumers become fed up with throttling, filtered content, and directed advertising from the major ISP companies, there will be a growth in homegrown ISPs.  Some regions, communities, and enterprising individuals have already started setting up their own ISPs around the US. Although the initial costs can be somewhat steep, in the long run people who opt to support such projects will benefit from a truly unbiased internet experience.  There's an interesting blog article about setting up a homegrown ISP: https://www.whoishostingthis.com/blog/2015/03/09/start-your-own-isp/.

 

Also, individual states can impose their own legislation to protect consumers from the ISP oligopoly and the corporate greed they represent.  A censored internet and the crippling of net neutrality should not be tolerated, and one could make the argument that it violates the first amendment of the constitution.