the forums at degreez.net

It is currently Sun Nov 29, 2020 10:24 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 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 12  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 08, 2004 9:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 16, 2004 9:22 pm
Posts: 5
I also have Shaw Extreme in Vancouver BC. My download speed has went from 200k+ to less than 5k the last couple of days.

It look like I am not the only Shaw subscriber suffering the BT problem. I have contact the Shaw Technical support. We went through the speed test and confirm I still have 5MB down and 1MB up connection. The only problem is it doesn't seem to apply to BT?!!

The Shaw technican claim it's my computer problem not on their side. He also deny knowing what Bit Torrent is and has done anything to limit our connection. That is the most absurd excuse a major ISP tech can said. It is as if they dont know one of the most popular P2P program eating up their bandwidth.

I dont know how Shaw is sniffing out the BT transfer while not limiting other program. Port change doesn't seem to get around Shaw's new tactic. However, I do seem to have more luck on Chinese BT site compare to English BT site.

Right now I am ready to cancel my $70/mth Shaw extreme service. It is totally useless to have 50GB transfer limit if I can use BT!! However, there doesn't seem to have many good ISP alternative. Telus ADSL is limit to 7GB down per month and that is insufficent.

I hope there is a solution somehow, otherwise BT is going to suffer greatly, when Shaw let other ISP know how to block BT transfer.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2004 1:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 16, 2004 9:22 pm
Posts: 5
After reading through the various site, I find a more detail explanation for shaw subscribers. You can read the detail at this link.

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/56419

I am ready to jump ship to Telus ADSL. too bad Shaw is not going to miss my $70/mth payment. Shaw is going to be happy to get rid of all the high bandwidth users so they can free up more bandwidth for their new VoIP service.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2004 7:53 am 
excuse my ignorance but, i don't have a router and i use Azureus i get crap download and upload speeds, my current server port on azureus is the default port 6881, im kinda dumb but what port should i change it to? to get better speeds all round?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2004 4:06 pm 
How to know which port to change to ????? :?


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Azurius client
PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2004 8:56 pm 
Hey, I use Azurius as my bittorrent client. How exactly do I fix this problem on Azurius. its set up is kinda different from just regular old bittorrent.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: port trottling
PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 6:40 pm 
need a little help here.i've been really fustrated by the change in port range.not only has it made my download rates fall to 5-7kB/s ,its absurd to wait more than 20-50hrs for a 500mb anime with 17 peers to finish.with port range from 10000-60000,even at randomized the chances of getting a connection seems pretty bleak.i don't really have this kind of problem with the old port range even behind a firewall with adsl connection,i can get up to 17-20kB/s.can anyone tell me what to do?i've changed the port range countless times but nothing works.i know there are many out there bitching about this but i am getting really tired of this.HELP!!!! :x


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 14, 2004 7:09 pm 
past 2 days, all my bt dl got limted to 5kb wen it was as high as 55kb..my broadband package dosent have any Gb limits.why do they still cap me.. my isp tiscali


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 15, 2004 12:45 pm 
TheSHAD0W wrote:
BitTorrent has no fixed port it contacts. There's a high probability it will connect to at least one client on port 6881, but because of this throttling problem that probability may decrease in the future. I'm sorry but you may have problems port-forwarding with that router in a few months.

I can understand ISPs wishing to throttle BT traffic, but throttling to zero is just wrong.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 16, 2004 3:33 am 
i had a hunch that my university was only blocking the tracker data, so i set up a socks proxy and router the tracker data through it. sort of worked... now instead of no bittorrent, i get crap bittorrent.

read about it here: [url]http://www.cryptocity.net/~dan/archives/2004/11/tunneling_bitto.html[url]

-dan


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 17, 2004 9:46 pm 
:evil: Oh i,m so pissed, i just used BT at normal D/L rate yesterday and suddenly this morning everything is throtled down and yellow light signaled in. Don't these ISP had nothing better to do than abusing us user??? we pay for the BILL! each month!!!! in case they didnt notice!!!


Top
  
 
 Post subject: please help
PostPosted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 7:43 pm 
damn man i used to have bit torrent ages ago but i had realy crap dl and ul rates so i uninstaled it

i just got bit tornado, its alot better as u can change all the prefs and stuff.

im sitting behind zone alarm (not pro) and a belkin router (F5D7630-4A).

now, i had a yellow light but i got rid of that by setting the ports:6881-6889 on my router and letting it through the firewall and all that stuff.

but i only had speeds of 0-5kb with 12+ seeds so i looked around the forums and did the "windows xp:sp2 patch" thing which helped a little bit.

im on a 1Mb broad band with BT Yahoo (thats "british telecom" not "bit torrent") and i have no dl limit

but my speeds are still only 15k at best :cry:

i get wicked speeds normally and im at my wits end.
this is my last hope. im pleading with my life


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 22, 2004 12:48 am 
taloni wrote:
I also have Shaw Extreme in Vancouver BC. My download speed has went from 200k+ to less than 5k the last couple of days.

It look like I am not the only Shaw subscriber suffering the BT problem. I have contact the Shaw Technical support. We went through the speed test and confirm I still have 5MB down and 1MB up connection. The only problem is it doesn't seem to apply to BT?!!

The Shaw technican claim it's my computer problem not on their side. He also deny knowing what Bit Torrent is and has done anything to limit our connection. That is the most absurd excuse a major ISP tech can said. It is as if they dont know one of the most popular P2P program eating up their bandwidth.

I dont know how Shaw is sniffing out the BT transfer while not limiting other program. Port change doesn't seem to get around Shaw's new tactic. However, I do seem to have more luck on Chinese BT site compare to English BT site.

Right now I am ready to cancel my $70/mth Shaw extreme service. It is totally useless to have 50GB transfer limit if I can use BT!! However, there doesn't seem to have many good ISP alternative. Telus ADSL is limit to 7GB down per month and that is insufficent.

I hope there is a solution somehow, otherwise BT is going to suffer greatly, when Shaw let other ISP know how to block BT transfer.


im from vancouver and yes its true, Shaw capped BT speeds, but i dont see a change. well, not that much. And im not on shaw i-extreme.

as for telus, there is no limit in how much you download. they do, but they "dont care"
all my friends download over 100GB dl/ul each month on telus.

shaw does have faster download speeds than telus, but who knows, sooner or later telus might do what shaw is doing at the moment.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:51 am 
This has become such a shit storm of paranoia.

Why would any ISP single out bittorrent over other p2p apps that generate just as much bandwidth overheads? Get a grip.

That fact that many of you have changed ports and noticed no considerable difference (some saying it's worse on different ports :lol:), just goes to show that it's not something that most ISP's are doing.

It's p2p, the speed you get depends on the other users. I have 25kb/s spread over 5 upload slots, so pretty much every user I upload to gets 5kb/s as long as their downstream can match. Funny that everytime I look at the advanced screen the download speeds I'm getting from others are closeer to 1kb/s or 2kb/s. So realistically I have to be connected to between 50-100 other peers to max out my download bandwidth, Uh huh, like that's going to happen.

Unless other people are prepared to upload at decent speeds, there's no damn way you're can download at decent speeds. I just dont understand why people dont upload, it doesn't completely fuck up your download speed as bad as people think. Just extreme paranoia again. I know I used to think that way, but now I get my upload bandwidth maxed out 24/7 all day long, and still download at crazy speeds (generally on other p2p).

I guarantee that if you found 20 other people on the same torrent, all without their uploads capped, you'd find that BT was just as good as ever.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: lookie here buddy...
PostPosted: Sun Dec 12, 2004 3:23 pm 
Anonymous wrote:
This has become such a shit storm of paranoia.

Why would any ISP single out bittorrent over other p2p apps that generate just as much bandwidth overheads? Get a grip.
Quote:


you can go ahead and insert your foot in your mouth now....


Quote:
p2pnet.net News:- Canada's Shaw Cable says it's deliberately throttling BitTorrent downloads.

The admission comes in CBC technology columnist Tod Maffin's mp3 of an interview with Shaw Communications president Peter Bissonnette.

"We can identify the kinds of useage that we're seeing on our network and this is very dynamic, and so we will manage that dynamically," Bissonnette says, also stating:.

"If, for instance, we see a huge amount of Torrent kind of peer-to-peer traffic, we can actually allocate, you know, bandwidth to ensure that that carries on, but not at the expense of our email and web serving customers.

"One percent of the users can actually use up to 90% of the network.

"Just like you do sometimes when you have a huge, super highway. Sometimes you have to put signs saying Slow Down here, or Go Fast there, or Slow Traffic Keep to the Right."

But as Maffin remarks, not everyone believes Shaw is merely protecting what it sees as customers' best interests.

Some cynics claim Shaw is in fact trying to up-sell people a more expensive package with faster speeds to BT users.

"Either way, the issue isn't going to disappear," Maffin observes.

Believe it.

http://p2pnet.net/story/3207


Quote:
I just dont understand why people dont upload, it doesn't completely fuck up your download speed as bad as people think. Just extreme paranoia again. I know I used to think that way, but now I get my upload bandwidth maxed out 24/7 all day long, and still download at crazy speeds (generally on other p2p).

I guarantee that if you found 20 other people on the same torrent, all without their uploads capped, you'd find that BT was just as good as ever.



you need to set your maximum global upload speed at 80-90% of your connections maximum upload speed in order to avoid the following. how about do some more research before you come here and try to preach:

Quote:
What is not generally well-known is that the upstream cap can also affect the downstream speed -- if the upstream is saturated by uploading (e.g., sending a large PowerPoint file to the boss, or running a Napster or other public service), the downstream will drop to about the same speed. This is due to a weakness in the basic TCP Internet protocol, not Cable or DSL per se, and not the service provider.

Cable Internet is more vulnerable to this problem than DSL. Unlike DSL, where each subscriber has a dedicated connection to the head-end (DSLAM), the Cable Internet upstream path to the head-end (CMTS) is shared by all subscribers on a given cable segment. If that upstream gets saturated, which might be caused by only a relatively few subscribers, downstream speeds take a big drop for all subscribers on that segment.

As an illustrative example, consider a DOCSIS cable segment with 4 upstream channels per downstream channel, and 1000 subscribers (a recommended maximum).

* The upstream channels can be anywhere from 160 Kbps (200 kHz QPSK) to 10 Mbps (3.2 MHz QAM 16), with 800 Khz QPSK perhaps the most common in practice, giving an upstream channel capacity of 640 Kbps.
* The downstream channel can be 27 Mbps (QAM 64) or 36 Mbps (QAM 256), with 27 Mbps (QAM 64) perhaps the most common in practice.

The aggregate upstream capacity of 4 channels would be about 2.5 Mbps, as compared to downstream capacity of 27 Mbps. If the upstream saturates, the downstream rate will drop to about the same speed, a dramatic slowdown of about 90% (2.5 Mbps as compared to 27 Mbps).

Even with cable modems capped to 128 Kbps upstream, 2.5 Mbps upstream capacity can handle only 20 (2.5 Mbps / 128 Kbps) simultaneously active modems before saturation. That's generally not a problem if cable modem usage is typically (1) infrequent, (2) downstream [e.g., web surfing], and (3) interactive [e.g., fetch-use]. The system can break down if those conditions are not met.

This makes it easier to see why certain Cable Internet providers condemn continuous use of upstream (e.g., running a popular public service) as "abuse" -- each such subscriber consumes capacity normally allocated for 1000 / 20 = 50 subscribers. Worse, there's a threshold effect: If the upstream is running at (say) 80% of capacity with typical subscribers, it takes only 4 (out of 1000) heavy upstream users at 128 Kbps to drive the upstream into saturation, thereby slowing downstream to a crawl for all subscribers on that segment. (Exact numbers, of course, depend on actual channel numbers and speeds.)

http://cable-dsl.home.att.net/



now can you see why cable companies would want to cut down on an upload intensive protocol like bittorrent, or do I need to draw you a picture too?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Dec 12, 2004 3:28 pm 
also here's a bit more reading for you, since you don't quite seem to understand how the whole thing works...

Quote:
I'm sure all of you notice that you usually download (much) faster than you upload on average, right? So, how is this possible, if the number of total bits downloaded in a swarm always equals the number of bits uploaded (Uploaded to downloaded ratio for a swarm as a whole must equal 1:1)?

* You download faster than you upload because some other peer is doing the exact opposite, i.e. uploading faster than they are downloading. A seed only uploads, contributing to the overall swarm upload count, allowing another peer(s) to download a bit more than they upload. Every peer uploading > downloading means another peer can download > upload.

* In small to medium-sized swarms, there are usually enough seeders (or peers with large upstream pipes) to support greater download speeds than upload speeds for the other peers in the swarm.

* However, I'm sure you've noticed that there are usually far more "leechers" than seeds in any given swarm. This is especially true in large swarms. You have thousands (or tens of thousands) of leechers wanting to download faster than they upload (since most net connections have larger downstream pipes than upstream), but only hundreds of seeders to support that desire. Those extra uploaded bits are being competed for by thousands of peers (rather than hundreds or dozens on smaller swarms), so you are much less likely to get that extra download speed you'd like.

* If you take the total number of seeds and divide them by the total number of peers in the swarm, then you can have some idea of the competition there is within the swarm for pieces and bandwidth. The total numbers of peers and seeds for any torrent can be found either on the tracker hosting that torrent, or in the case of Azureus, the numbers in brackets in the seeds and peers columns. If there are too few seeds, then the competition for limited bandwidth, and rare pieces will be enormous, and the download will be slow no matter what the overall size of the swarm is.

* Unfortunately you can't pull bits out of thin air; they need to be uploaded by someone. This is why downloading on large swarms seems to go slower than on smaller swarms: everybody's uploading at only 10k/s, but wanting to download at 100k/s....which is impossible, since the overall swarm ratio will/must always be 1:1.

* And remember, seeding is really really important! Somebody spent time seeding so that you could download the file. So it is crucial that you seed so that other people can share it too. That is why it is called p2p file sharing and not p2p file downloading. Any time you feel that this may be too much of an inconvenience for you, or think you have too small an upstream pipe, think about all those who spent ages seeding no matter what the size of their pipe, so you could download. Please try to keep that in mind. Thanks.


well, I don't know who created this page, but I added the paragraph on dividing seeds by peers, and about the importance of seeding. Not a big contribution I know. Every little bit helps.

decibelle.
hxxp://azureus.sourceforge.net/wiki/ind ... loadSpeeds


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 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 12  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 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