the forums at degreez.net

It is currently Fri Jun 23, 2017 12:56 pm

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 175 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 24, 2005 1:48 am 
Anyone else here using Win98SE and have Roadrunner Cable ISP and having this kind of issue??

Ever since RR upgraded in my area to have 5MB connections, I never stay connected to peers, only seeds. So, all my BT downloads have 0.000 percent in sharing. :x

I can download just fine, If I manually connect over and over, 1-3 peers show up for a split second. The most I've been able to share these last few days is 0.017...

I think RR put an upload cap on all ports since I've tried many different settings between 10000-60000. I only use one instance of BT, but still let it choose within a range of 20.

Could it be something else? I've tried reading all the many man posts in here and no one has mentioned if they are even connected to peers while experiencing this issue.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 29, 2005 1:44 am 
I've been using Azureus since trying the BT P2P means of sharing things, and it's been fine. Uploads and downloads seemed reasonable, though I encountered lots of disconnects from peers trying to download from me, just like with eMule and WinMX on this Optimum Online connection.

Then, I tried seeding a new torrent (my first) yesterday, and Azureus did fine for about 30MB, then stopped uploading to everyone for that particular torrent. Odd.

After some reading in dslreports.com, I came here and downloaded 0.3.12, got used to the interesting interface, and checked off, "Break-up seed bitfield to foil ISP manipulation". Although I still see uploads disconnecting, they seem much fewer than under Azureus - plus, I have been able to seed my new torrent quite successfully while maintaining a rate which hopefully keeps me under ISP automatic capping. It feels good to control my uploads again and have them be effective.

Thank you to those people in the Full Credits section of the BitTornado About box.

Now I wonder if the same magic could is applicable for sharing with the eMule Dev team . . .

- ooofest


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 29, 2005 6:07 am 
TornadoTorrentTEMP wrote:
Oh BTW I tried REGISTERING and the activation E-Mail never comes....ADMIN PLEASE HELP....

-TornadoTorrent

Try your junk mail box :?:


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: More from the UK
PostPosted: Fri Apr 29, 2005 9:44 am 
humorak wrote:
Looking at the ADSL site everyone seems to be moaning on the Tiscali and BT-Yahoo (British Telecom) forums. There's a disgruntled Tiscali customer who got his bt throttled, moved his settings over to port 80, said it did the trick, see How long is this capping gonna last?. Is that the future...

BT-Yahoo have delayed (again) the introduction of their monthly bw limits. They have a jolly page on what you can do with 15G a month - surf for 15 hours a day, upload/download 250 jpegs a week, download 250 mp3s a week, watch 3 hours of video a week, listen to internet radio 15 hours a week and still have time to send those 3000 emails a week, gosh what busy lives... Nice to see Internet Radio in the list though. The limits are now coming in august, and, yes they appear to counting uploads into the total.



How do you do that? Can you teach me how to?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2005 3:40 pm 
In Bittornado click on Prefs and in the top right corner enter Port 80 as the Port Range...
I'm not convinced myself. They have far more sophisticated methods for blocking/throttling P2P these days, and i definitely can't see that working with an Isp as big as Tiscali, even if they are the worst Isp known to man and anyone who signs up with them needs their head testing :roll:


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 07, 2005 7:29 pm 
just change ur port ranges and the change the ports u forward too. i do this and it seems to b working :twisted:


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 08, 2005 4:49 pm 
Anonymous wrote:
In Bittornado click on Prefs and in the top right corner enter Port 80 as the Port Range...
I'm not convinced myself. They have far more sophisticated methods for blocking/throttling P2P these days, and i definitely can't see that working with an Isp as big as Tiscali, even if they are the worst Isp known to man and anyone who signs up with them needs their head testing :roll:


And if you think that is worst,come to singapore and you will find out that all the ISPs here (3 of them) are state own.Namely,the worst is singtel(the biggest state owned telcom) not only severly cap bandwidth but also provide THe worst internet service known to man.

Just imagine,paying for a adsl 256 connection and your max dl rate is like 30kb/s,on cable you'll be lucky to be able to hit over 150kb/s.Oh yeah they are also very supportive of bandwidth capping and p-cube,the lastest p2p traffic killer.If anyone of you guys are living in aust,optus is owned by singtel,they are also practicing th same thing.

If you think we can complain or take our biz else where,fat chance.In a country that bans chewing gum,there is only so much we can do.So yeah ,this sucks tremendously,especially here in singapore.And yes,the gov here is very anal when it comes to such things.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 24, 2005 1:08 am 
I couldn't agree more with Frostmore. Things are getting worse with no end in sight.

Read http://forums.degreez.net/viewtopic.php?t=5303 and http://forums.degreez.net/viewtopic.php?t=5016


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 26, 2005 6:30 am 
KeroGuest wrote:
2 Questions:

1: I have Bit Torrent, which doesn't seem to have any way to alter preferences of any kind. Am I just out of luck unless I download BitTornado, or is there still a way to benefit from your advice?

2: My usual BT dl speed is around 7k, but on good days it can go as high as 45k. Wouldn't this indicate that the slow speed is due to something other than an ISP cap? I would think an ISP cap on my ports would have a more consistent slowing effect.


Not if they want you to believe that they dont ;)


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 26, 2005 7:18 am 
solvalou wrote:
Hi guys.

I didn't quite understand the port thing yet. Let me show you my example:

I'm using a router with NAT enabled. I configured BT to use a port range from 40035-40045.

When I start downloading and the peers connect I get the IP and port from them. Lets say 3 peers are connected.. when I go check my router NAT port assignements I see that (im using ficitious IPs here)
64.3.10.11 port 6000
100.100.2.3 port 3000
11.38.25.12 port 2000

are connected and my NAT translates those addresses to my internal LAN as

1.1.1.1 port 4000
1.1.1.1 port 4001
1.1.1.1 port 4002
(1.1.1.1 is my computer)

and then my NAT send the information back to those peers with my WAN external IP like this

64.12.12.24 port 4000
64.12.12.24 port 4001
64.12.12.24 port 4002

so my question is: what is the port range thing I configured in BT (40035-40045) importance in all this as it seems its not even using those port ranges ?

From what I understood im receiveing the external IP and port from the peer, then my NAT is translating it to my computer using a default port range around 4000+ and then returning the data for the peer with my external WAN IP and using the same port it used for my iternal translation, in this case 4000+ range.

any info will be greatly apreciated



This is getting weirder and weirder for me since I also have a similar problem.

No matter what ports I configure my BitTornado the other peers/seeds still connect to my 1056+ ports (!?)


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 26, 2005 7:18 am 
solvalou wrote:
Hi guys.

I didn't quite understand the port thing yet. Let me show you my example:

I'm using a router with NAT enabled. I configured BT to use a port range from 40035-40045.

When I start downloading and the peers connect I get the IP and port from them. Lets say 3 peers are connected.. when I go check my router NAT port assignements I see that (im using ficitious IPs here)
64.3.10.11 port 6000
100.100.2.3 port 3000
11.38.25.12 port 2000

are connected and my NAT translates those addresses to my internal LAN as

1.1.1.1 port 4000
1.1.1.1 port 4001
1.1.1.1 port 4002
(1.1.1.1 is my computer)

and then my NAT send the information back to those peers with my WAN external IP like this

64.12.12.24 port 4000
64.12.12.24 port 4001
64.12.12.24 port 4002

so my question is: what is the port range thing I configured in BT (40035-40045) importance in all this as it seems its not even using those port ranges ?

From what I understood im receiveing the external IP and port from the peer, then my NAT is translating it to my computer using a default port range around 4000+ and then returning the data for the peer with my external WAN IP and using the same port it used for my iternal translation, in this case 4000+ range.

any info will be greatly apreciated



This is getting weirder and weirder for me since I also have a similar problem.

No matter what ports I configure my BitTornado the other peers/seeds still connect to my 1056+ ports (!?)


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 24, 2005 2:52 pm 
Ports 1024 - 5000 are universally used to SEND data.

The ports that you specify for Bit Tornado are for INCOMING.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 18, 2005 12:33 am 
Ok so I am no good at techie stuff but there are so many smarties out there can someone please figure out how best to get around the isp packet filtering that keeps downloads slow even on non-throttled ports?! Please! And then *please* share the tech with (PC AND Mac) bittorrent client writers so they can write updated clients with the new workarounds. Would hate to think that the isp's etc. can actually beat the techie community!! I have a 26Mb connection here in Japan and I have seen some awesome (though brief) speeds with that, but in the last few months it's been consistently rubbish, not to mention I have my uploads at unilmited but it doesn't go above 10kbs...


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 21, 2005 7:00 pm 
Here in Chile the ISP's do the same thing... VTR (the major broadband isp) have a device called Shasta 5000 for shaping our p2p traffic... the port trick don't work... but the worst part is: VTR says "we don't shaping any connection, we don't make anything, all is fine, bla bla bla..." :evil: :evil:

sorry for my english... grrr...


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2005 2:04 pm 
I unstalled SP2 & all of the hot fix patches, updated McCafee Internet Security Suite and my speeds jumped right back up there to 300K on a 3 Mpbs connection.


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 175 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group