I didn’t say “allow unrestricted P2P”, I said “How do they justify fraud and terminating connections (over, say, traffic shaping) as a ‘best effort’?”
Again, the issue (to me) is not that they are limiting throughput or having to make business decisions that mean less P2P bandwidth, it’s that they fraudulently advertise a certain service and don’t deliver and that they effect their limitations by breaking connections instead of slowing them.
I can tell you with 100% certainty that there is no chance, none whatsoever, that Comcast is deliberately blocking access to Google. Somebody screwed up some configuration somewhere(your link seems to indicate a DNS problem).
I don’t know, that’s why I was asking. I’m under the impression that “running a server” involves more than just uploading files. Are you saying that Comcast customers uploading files are violating a service agreement they have with Comcast?
If that’s so, I’m curious why Comcast hasn’t simply stated this in their defense and why you didn’t use it as a debate point earlier in this thread.
I can’t speak for Comcast, but I would guess that if they brought up the “running a server” argument, that would hurt them in the future if they decided that they needed to manage downstream traffic as well. They’d prefer to set the precedent that they do have the right to manage traffic on their network when it’s to benefit their customer base as a whole.