ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

Pocky888 · 2006-02-01 00:49:48

well, bitcomit protocol header encryption doesn't work for me
right now i hope more users use utorrent v1.41 beta 11 and above so that i can test it out
most bt i download still have more bitcomit & azurues users.

td4guy · 2006-02-01 15:45:38

The list on the Azureus wiki reports quite a few ISPs.

Sinister32 · 2006-02-02 11:54:35

add Atlantic Broadband(us) to the list. i was told that they began to throttle all P2P and newsgroup traffic as of 3-4 weeks ago (right around the beginning of 2006) and my current speeds are reflecitng it.

monkeyfarm · 2006-02-02 21:02:47

OK. so I've got the new beta with the encryption, and there's no difference in speeds. I've tried all the various options, uncheck the legacy box.. nuttin'...

Is this going to not be worthwhile until all clients are using the encryption?

Firon · 2006-02-02 23:12:18

You might wanna wait until a stable release of both clients is out, or something. Also, the options don't take effect until you restart the torrent.

MoJo · 2006-02-03 10:42:54

Yep this feature is worthless without a major portion of the BT userbase using it. BitComet didn't have a public beta of there PHE, it was just released ... and that gave it the effect of working right off the bat. So this feature is tied in with the userbase supporting it, which as of now is a limited amount of beta testers spread over the net.

evolution3 · 2006-02-03 12:28:50

jroc, i am having the same problem most are having with rcn. Downloads are fine, but when they finish, the upload is capped to nothing (when downloading, it seeds fine). Just wondering if you had any changes or improvements you would like to share. The 9000 ports dont seem to be working. I've been reading here, trying to keep up on the situation.

hxxp://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,14997671

pretty long, but some interesting info from people who work for rcn, start around page 11.

Last edited by evolution3 (2006-02-03 12:37:06)

chaosblade · 2006-02-03 13:03:06

Seems like the monitor for the COMPLETED event then start cutting connections.

jroc · 2006-02-03 19:42:18

First I tried a port in the 2400's now I use 9301 and 9302. Been able to upload fine since last year. I did try upping my own torrent and it took forever for peers to connect. That was when I was using 1.1.7.2, tho. It might help to find out if RCN allows VOIP and which port it uses. They have their own land-line phone service, so they might see VOIP as the enemy....

**Update 2-7-06***

There is one way I discovered just messing around in my client settings to get around ISP issues. It only helps for downloading then seeding, not upping ur own stuff. It got me banned on the pink pig, so I may or may not discuss it here. Then again, most sites are not stuck up like the pink pig...lol that demon dude had no problem once I explained the situation. the pink pig wouldnt even let me explain. Oh well. Its not cheating, cuz u are doing actual uploading. But the pink pig has a ratio cheat ban thing going on. If caught (or in my case suspected of with no real evidence) cheating u get banned. I may just email the technique to Firon and see what he say. Its a common feature in many clients. I just used it a lil more specifically

Last edited by jroc (2006-02-07 12:44:15)

LaMa · 2006-02-08 21:32:15

Add to that list...

Chello (Netherlands)

They are now shaping traffic, although not everyone seems to have problems.
I guess it's only done in (crowded) areas.

I noticed Chello was aslo added to AzureusWiki's list under the "ISPs whose Tier 1 partners might shape" section.

Anyway, Protocol Encryption from 1.4.1b solves this problem wonderfully!

I'm just waiting for the "encrypted enabled" userbase to expand now.
Making it a default setting in the next stable release will most likely give a major boost

Last edited by LaMa (2006-02-08 21:32:48)

hofshi · 2006-02-09 06:16:39

sadly, I have to update that it seems that my ISP (Barak, Israel) throttles bittorent downloads as well as uploads now.
I'm not even getting close to maxing my connection on the OOo torrent.

Ares · 2006-02-09 06:48:29

Cebridge Connections (www.cebridge.net) limits Bittorrent and VNC traffic in Buckhannon, WV.

Cebridge is also located in (USA):
AR, CA, CO, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MD, MO, NC, NM, NV, OH, OK, OR, PA, TN, TX, VA, WA, WV

according to:
http://www.cebridge.net/cebridge/ctl?vo=contactUsList

-Ares

Last edited by Ares (2006-02-09 06:56:11)

MentosMan · 2006-02-09 18:20:58

winMX_67 wrote:

Well, I know that people say that comcast reports your IP adress to the P2P police. Since they work with time warner.

This is news to me. Should those of us with Comcast be worried at all?

Mouse · 2006-02-11 21:03:39

I have a possible solution for the P2P speed problems. I'm rolling out a public VPN service that should solve the speed caps. My idea is that if you keep your data encrypted until you get past your local ISP they won't speed cap your connection. I would like some feedback on your download speeds before and after the VPN link was brought up.

http://www.secureix.com

Firon · 2006-02-11 21:30:23

Can't you already do that with Protocol Encryption?

Mouse · 2006-02-11 21:39:05

Firon wrote:

Can't you already do that with Protocol Encryption?

I don't know how PE is being done, but as a general rule any type of application level encryption often will leave hints of being a p2p protocol.

If you encrypt every packet your computer puts out there is no chance of being detected as a p2p data. Once the VPN is up you actually get assigned a new IP address.

Murdoc · 2006-02-12 17:32:53

I see that you have intension of charging money in the near future for this type of service. I was wondering what would happen if big companies or perhaps the R*AA people are storming into your server. What happens then? Also, what would happen to us after the beta period?

1c3d0g · 2006-02-12 17:44:33

Murdoc wrote:

I see that you have intension of charging money in the near future for this type of service. ...

Huh? Who told you that?

hofshi · 2006-02-12 17:47:23

"NEW: We are offering our service completely FREE during our beta test period"

1c3d0g · 2006-02-12 17:54:04

Hofshi: I thought Murdoc was referring to µTorrent. Nevermind my comment.

Mouse · 2006-02-12 18:37:27

Murdoc wrote:

I see that you have intension of charging money in the near future for this type of service. I was wondering what would happen if big companies or perhaps the R*AA people are storming into your server. What happens then? Also, what would happen to us after the beta period?

I'm unsure what "storming into your server" means. I've dealt with subpoenas and DMCA issues before. It's not a big deal. The DMCA provides a reasonable amount of protection for the ISP.

As for the end of the beta period, I'm unsure if/what/when. I've always been a fan of offering a free "lite" versions.

Firon · 2006-02-12 18:44:28

I registered for it, gonna try it out later

teucom · 2006-02-12 19:14:59

Well, things get better ...

Over here in Germany, many ISPs used to limit bandwith on certain services like p2p, because for many years most ISPs over here were just bandwith resellers without own backbones or last mile networks.

But now many regional or local ISPs build their own infrastructure, making them independent of large scale network providers, so a lot of competition between local/regional and nationwide ISPs is going on nowadays.

Now more and more regional ISPs (as the one in my hometown, NetCologne) and even the biggest nationwide ISP, T-Com, not only dropped port and bw limitation ... they ADVERTISE BIG astounding things like "Absolutely no port blocking! No bandwith limitation!". ;-)

And they mean it! ;-)

Only some very-cheapo-ISPs, still resellers without own network infrastructure limit traffic, but their main target are low traffic or call-by-call internet customers anyway. Also port dependend traffic limitation is still seen on some shared media type providers like Cable-TV ISPs with old infrastructure, or DSL-by-Satellite services.

Competition WILL do the trick, even if it takes its time.

H.Th.

Last edited by teucom (2006-02-12 19:25:29)

1c3d0g · 2006-02-12 21:00:49

Although some ISP's are continuing to block P2P traffic, it appears I have some good news:

Shaw, one of the nastiest ISP's when it comes to BitTorrent throttling, looks like it's powerless - for now at least - to stop the latest µTorrent builds (with Encryption enabled). This specific peer was maxed out the whole time (200 kB/s), which is a fairly rare occurrence by itself, let alone on a bastard ISP like Shaw. The Encryption scheme is working, so good job Ludde!

Murdoc · 2006-02-13 15:59:17

1c3d0g wrote:

Although some ISP's are continuing to block P2P traffic, it appears I have some good news:
http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/3886 … ing1yv.png
Shaw, one of the nastiest ISP's when it comes to BitTorrent throttling, looks like it's powerless - for now at least - to stop the latest µTorrent builds (with Encryption enabled). This specific peer was maxed out the whole time (200 kB/s), which is a fairly rare occurrence by itself, let alone on a bastard ISP like Shaw. The Encryption scheme is working, so good job Ludde!

I was wondering if this actually works with ROGERS as well. The reason is because without the VPN connection mouse provided, my speeds were stuck between 0 and 5kb maxed out 7 kb per sec which really annoyed me. I've noticed my uploads never exceeding 4 kb/sec. Does this header encryption benefit rogers users?

µTorrent Community Forums

#51 2006-02-01 00:49:48

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#52 2006-02-01 15:45:38

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#53 2006-02-02 11:54:35

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#54 2006-02-02 21:02:47

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#55 2006-02-02 23:12:18

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#56 2006-02-03 10:42:54

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#57 2006-02-03 12:28:50

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#58 2006-02-03 13:03:06

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#59 2006-02-03 19:42:18

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#60 2006-02-08 21:32:15

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#61 2006-02-09 06:16:39

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#62 2006-02-09 06:48:29

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#63 2006-02-09 18:20:58

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#64 2006-02-11 21:03:39

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#65 2006-02-11 21:30:23

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#66 2006-02-11 21:39:05

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#67 2006-02-12 17:32:53

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#68 2006-02-12 17:44:33

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#69 2006-02-12 17:47:23

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#70 2006-02-12 17:54:04

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#71 2006-02-12 18:37:27

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#72 2006-02-12 18:44:28

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#73 2006-02-12 19:14:59

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#74 2006-02-12 21:00:49

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

#75 2006-02-13 15:59:17

Re: ISPs that throttle/interfere with BitTorrent

Board footer