Upload vs Download, cost to an ISP

[Totempole]

Something I noticed across numerous uncapped accounts is that when they shape or throttle, usually they target download, and leave uploads unshaped for the most part. I've also heard from someone that with MWEB, upload isn't counted against your threshold (not sure how true this is).

So does this mean that upload traffic costs an ISP less than the equivalent amount of download traffic, or is it just that downloads are more likely to have an overall impact on the network?

 

[PsyWulf]

ADSL is asynchronous - meaning the uploads are a fraction of download speed. Add to this the fact that most internet usage (especially home use) is consumption,rather than production and you have a situation where traffic out is orders of magnitude less (especially true if you are a high-downloader the ratio skews even further)

Usually they also include a clause to limit or restrict you from hosting services on your home account

 

[shanezn]

I average about 10gb a month on uploads alone, but yeah, as pointed out above, that is peanuts compared to traffic coming in.

 

[Totempole]

ADSL is asynchronous - meaning the uploads are a fraction of download speed. Add to this the fact that most internet usage (especially home use) is consumption,rather than production and you have a situation where traffic out is orders of magnitude less (especially true if you are a high-downloader the ratio skews even further)

Usually they also include a clause to limit or restrict you from hosting services on your home account

I'm aware of this, but this isn't really what I was asking. I understand that upload traffic is significantly less than download traffic due to asymetrical speeds and a bias towards downloading.

What I'm getting at is, if an ISP also throttles upload slightly, wouldn't that allow a bit more download capacity across the pool of users? Or is upload capacity and download capacity two separate things for an ISP?

Consider this on a much smaller scale:

You have 2 PCs connected to one another via a 1Gb LAN connection. If I from PC1, send a file to PC 2 and take a file from PC 2 at the same time, the 1Gb connection would be divided between upload and download.

But if I have 2 PCs with 2x 1Gb Lan connections, 1 dedicated to upload and the other dedicated to download, then upload would have absolutely no impact on download and vice versa.

So for ISP's which scenario would it be? Is upload and download in the same pool, or do they have 2 separate pipes for each?

 

[Johnatan56]

I'm aware of this, but this isn't really what I was asking. I understand that upload traffic is significantly less than download traffic due to asymetrical speeds and a bias towards downloading.

What I'm getting at is, if an ISP also throttles upload slightly, wouldn't that allow a bit more download capacity across the pool of users? Or is upload capacity and download capacity two separate things for an ISP?

Consider this on a much smaller scale:

You have 2 PCs connected to one another via a 1Gb LAN connection. If I from PC1, send a file to PC 2 and take a file from PC 2 at the same time, the 1Gb connection would be divided between upload and download.

But if I have 2 PCs with 2x 1Gb Lan connections, 1 dedicated to upload and the other dedicated to download, then upload would have absolutely no impact on download and vice versa.

So for ISP's which scenario would it be? Is upload and download in the same pool, or do they have 2 separate pipes for each?

Because the upload is already so slow, what's the point? But to ISPs there would be no difference.
(same pipes)