Neronut

Established Members
  • Content Count

    37
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Neronut

  1. I have also seen that in the tracker status, however the downloaded files that finished shortly after I saw it worked fine
  2. Just a quick question, what prompted the addition of UDP trackers? Wasn't this something that wasn't stable or a standard? Just curious, about to download now and give 'er a whirl
  3. Hey - just grabbed the latest alpha Nice to see the upload issue has been worked on to lower the ramped upload speed I noticed that a lot of the UDP traffic by uTP is getting bad checksum results (Wireshark). This may just be a characteristic of UDP but i was wondering if anyone else was also seeing this? I can post the Wireshark data if needed just let me know. Excellent Work Edit: I just noticed some TCP packets have a similar issue, but the speeds don't seem to be affected.
  4. @animeking: Bell has a tendency to throttle for about 16:00 till 2:00 although depending on load they will lighten up a bit (30kB/sec -> ~50kB/sec [which is a lot for Bell apparently]). I noticed that your original post was at 17:53 but the edit was at 1:16 which the speed increase matches the timing of them letting more flow though. The uTP issue may be similar to mine where the client isn't mapping the UDP ports with UPnP (this would only happen if it was enabled in the client and your router supported it.) If the port won't map the uTP speed will be brutally slow. If this is the case, the second time you tried it may have actually mapped the proper ports which would help the speeds greatly.
  5. I keep getting UDP port mapping errors with UPnP [2009-04-15 18:41:03] UPnP: Discovered host: http://192.168.1.1:2869/IGatewayDeviceDescDoc [2009-04-15 18:41:03] UPnP: TCP port 34056 -> 192.168.1.80:34056 is already mapped. Not re-mapping. [2009-04-15 18:41:03] UPnP: ERROR mapping UDP port 34056 -> 192.168.1.80:34056. Deleting mapping and trying again: (718) The port mapping entry specified conflicts with a mapping assigned previously to another client [2009-04-15 18:41:03] UPnP: Removed UDP port 34056 [2009-04-15 18:41:03] UPnP: ERROR mapping UDP port 34056 -> 192.168.1.80:34056: (718) The port mapping entry specified conflicts with a mapping assigned previously to another client [2009-04-15 19:01:06] UPnP: Discovered host: http://192.168.1.1:2869/IGatewayDeviceDescDoc [2009-04-15 19:01:06] UPnP: TCP port 34056 -> 192.168.1.80:34056 is already mapped. Not re-mapping. [2009-04-15 19:01:06] UPnP: ERROR mapping UDP port 34056 -> 192.168.1.80:34056. Deleting mapping and trying again: (718) The port mapping entry specified conflicts with a mapping assigned previously to another client [2009-04-15 19:01:06] UPnP: Removed UDP port 34056 [2009-04-15 19:01:06] UPnP: ERROR mapping UDP port 34056 -> 192.168.1.80:34056: (718) The port mapping entry specified conflicts with a mapping assigned previously to another client [2009-04-15 19:21:06] UPnP: Could not map UPnP Port on this pass, retrying. [2009-04-15 19:21:09] UPnP: Discovered host: http://192.168.1.1:2869/IGatewayDeviceDescDoc [2009-04-15 19:21:09] UPnP: TCP port 34056 -> 192.168.1.80:34056 is already mapped. Not re-mapping. [2009-04-15 19:21:09] UPnP: ERROR mapping UDP port 34056 -> 192.168.1.80:34056. Deleting mapping and trying again: (718) The port mapping entry specified conflicts with a mapping assigned previously to another client [2009-04-15 19:21:09] UPnP: Removed UDP port 34056 [2009-04-15 19:21:09] UPnP: ERROR mapping UDP port 34056 -> 192.168.1.80:34056: (718) The port mapping entry specified conflicts with a mapping assigned previously to another client [2009-04-15 19:33:03] UPnP: Discovered host: http://192.168.1.1:2869/IGatewayDeviceDescDoc [2009-04-15 19:33:03] UPnP: Removed TCP port 34056 [2009-04-15 19:33:03] UPnP: Mapped TCP port 44365 -> 192.168.1.80:44365 [2009-04-15 19:33:03] UPnP: TCP port 44365 -> 192.168.1.80:44365 mapped successfully. [2009-04-15 19:33:03] UPnP: ERROR mapping UDP port 44365 -> 192.168.1.80:44365. Deleting mapping and trying again: (718) The port mapping entry specified conflicts with a mapping assigned previously to another client [2009-04-15 19:33:03] UPnP: Removed UDP port 44365 [2009-04-15 19:33:03] UPnP: ERROR mapping UDP port 44365 -> 192.168.1.80:44365: (718) The port mapping entry specified conflicts with a mapping assigned previously to another client WHy is the TCP happily mapping? When I look at whats mapped with UPnP it shows µTorrent (TCP) only. Weird.
  6. I was using both a global and per torrent restriction and it still had a mind of its own :S
  7. I have recently been using µTorrent on two different computers on my network and have started noticing an error with UPnP - I don't think this was there with 1.8.1 although by the looks of the error it may very well have been. [2009-04-13 15:15:54] UPnP: Discovered host: http://192.168.1.1:2869/IGatewayDeviceDescDoc [2009-04-13 15:16:01] UPnP: Mapped TCP port 61995 -> 192.168.1.80:61995 [2009-04-13 15:16:01] UPnP: TCP port 61995 -> 192.168.1.80:61995 mapped successfully. [2009-04-13 15:16:01] UPnP: ERROR mapping UDP port 61995 -> 192.168.1.80:61995. Deleting mapping and trying again: (718) The port mapping entry specified conflicts with a mapping assigned previously to another client [2009-04-13 15:16:01] UPnP: Removed UDP port 61995 [2009-04-13 15:16:01] UPnP: ERROR mapping UDP port 61995 -> 192.168.1.80:61995: (718) The port mapping entry specified conflicts with a mapping assigned previously to another client I have seen it error on both TCP and UDP, just TCP but not UDP and just UDP and not TCP. I'm going to assume this is normal because both instances try to register themselves as the same thing and the router notifies them that there is already an entry of that name and so they fight over the mapping. Is there some way I can name/identify each client as its own and allow both to coexist in harmony? Edit: I have a Linksys WRT56GS with stock firmware. Wired Connection from one comp, wireless from the other. Edit 2: I just noticed (and this maybe related to the top of this page) that all of a sudden µTorrent decides not to abide by the speed limit (not even the per torrent limit) and max out my upload causing my download to suffer greatly (see picture). I'm using the latest alpha 14981. I has now stayed in this operation and is uploading and downloading at the same speeds not obeying the upload limit.
  8. I just got the latest build 14908 on my W2k3 server and it seems happy. My upload speed limits are still working although there is the minor blip it matches my bandwidth meter so I don't see too much of an issue there - its just now displaying the correct value It seems faster too me, but I just started using it so maybe its from a cold state. It also still with bt.transp_disposition = 10 to increase for a bit, then drop, then increase, then drop. This may be caused by my ISP as they enjoy playing god with traffic but I thought I'd mention it anyway. Look good so far - have been using 1.9 since forever
  9. @Illusion4u & my issue I have tried to recreate this issue over the last few days and it hasn't returned. The odd thing I haven't changed anything. It just seems to be working now.
  10. I primarily use uTP as it helps with speeds. From Illusion4u's results it seems it is the issue? I use Windows Firewall and have a corporate version of Symantic Anti-Virus. When I get home today I will try and see what happens when I disable them. Although my problem is seemingly intermittent so I will see what happens. On a side note: I have noticed since the last build and the newest built that the UPnP is having trouble mapping TCP and/or UDP ports. It will give an error saying it could map the ports or it will sometimes say that there was a bad command and the ports weren't mapped. Although I have a feeling this is my stupid router casing this problem. Its a Linksys WRT54GS v6 where the S part has never worked, even with the corresponding Linksys PCMCIA card.
  11. Hi Illusion4u, did you ever figure out why? I have started using my server for running µTorrent now because of this but its W2k3 so its suffers from the pre-Vista network stack.
  12. @Firon: I have random various files (its a Downloads folder with random crap in it). Hmmm could that be the issue? Its looking for something thats not there? Although non of the torrents in the program and in that dir they are in another dedicated dir.
  13. Every-so-often when I go to open the latest µTorrent (14659) on Vista my CPU shoots up to 100% on one of my cores and I have noticed that it is explorer that hits 50% CPU (the 100% on one core). I have also noted that when I go to open the Task Manager it takes forever to open and when I do anything with it it takes forever. In the mean while µTorrent takes forever to open. Once it does explorer.exe is frozen to commands from the mouse in chunks of time and then runs them one all at one. µTorrent also runs slower then normal (like changing a setting and clicking OK) but the main interface (changing tabs and such) seem to work fine. I'm not sure what I should send in in terms of statistics but let me know and when it does happen again I can get the required information. A reboot usually fixes this problem, but thats quite invasive. Once it is open the CPU drops to normal unless I open the Task Manager or open a dialog box in the program or click on it or hover over the tray icon.
  14. Ya, the speed performance jumped when i switched to it. it was chugging along at about 20 kB/sec, then when switched it jumped to about 200 kB/sec. Weird I know.
  15. @rafi: Good idea, I have put both in to a zip file here I noticed that the old settings.dat file is bigger then the new one.
  16. I just found something interesting with µTorrent 1.9 and I'm not sure why. I was using it on a Windows 2k3 server that i have on the same network as my notebook (Vista) (which I usually use for µTorrent, but figured I could run it on the server because its always on). Anyways, so I installed µTorrent 1.9 to give it a shot on W2k3 because it was working beautifully for me on my notebook but it didn't perform as well on the server. I was puzzled at this because if I ran it on my notebook and the server (both clients using different ports [poor little router]) my notebook's speed would be much faster then the servers. I pondered this for a few days, tired to make the settings the same for both, at least the ones I though would make a difference, but all with no luck. Then it hit me, why not try using the same settings.dat file for the W2k3 client as I do on my notebook. So I made a backup of the fresh file from µTorrent 1.9 and copied over my other copy. Now the downloads are acting similar. The only thing that I think is special about the file from my notebook is that it is for the days of µTorrent 1.8 where as the W2k3 file if fresh from 1.9. I'm not sure on what has changed in this file but something is making a difference. Just thought I would let this out, and if there is any test that I should run let me know. Has anyone else noticed something similar? P.S. Both computers are running the latest beta. The settings file has survived though all 1.8.x excluding 1.8.2 as it came out after 1.9.
  17. Curious question: Why does the client say beta everywhere when its classified as alpha? And: Has any one run the latest alpha on 2 computers behind the same NAT? What has your performance been like?
  18. @GTHK & moogly Thanks, thats neat
  19. I was perusing the Advanced settings and found this option called "isp.bep22" and its set to false. I looked in the help file but it doesn't exist. Is this new to µTorrent 1.9? What does it do?
  20. @Firon I'm using the default windows Vista Firewall - Explorer would al freeze whenever I went over or click on the µTorrent icon in the system tray or on the Taskbar entry. Edit: A reboot fixed it - forgot to mention. Weird.
  21. I'm using the current Alpha 14470 and when I go to open it today it is having some issues. First it slows Explorer down to a crawl and when trying to use the Task Manager to crash it no luck, it freezes and then when it comes back the CPU usage slowly goes up to 100% then it finally kills it. Even just clicking on it takes Explorer for a ride. I'm using Vista SP1 2 GB RAM - if that helps Odd - I think maybe rebooting will help - will update. Edit: I decided to leave it and Explorer completely froze and then µTorrent started up - with Explorer still frozen, the after a bit more it came back to life. Weird.
  22. @rafi: I'm going to assume at this point that its not a bug, its just not showing all the overheard.
  23. Your saying to turn it off? I have it on so it calculates the protocol overhead, but it seems to be missing some? Without it, the throttling doesn't work well and my upload is killed (maxed) which takes down every Internet related activity and slows the downloads to a crawl.
  24. I've been using 1.9 with exclusivly uTP for a while now. *Helps beat name withheld's throttling* I have not seen too many problems with net.calc_overhead on, the only weird this is I have my upload throttled to 28 kB/sec but the client maxes out at 25.9/26 kB/sec although my little bandwidth meter shows its at 28 - 30. It seems the client is throttling it properly but not displaying the correct value? IF you'd like more information I will be happy to provide it for you. I'm not sure of this but does anyone know if Linksys routers (WRT54GS) have troubles with UDP traffic? It seems that every so often it has trouble with it, but it wasn't there when I was using 1.8.1. Also, question, what is Hole Punching and what is it used for?
  25. Hey All, Just started using the latest build (14470) and currently my download is maxed. Using uTP only to improve experience with a throttling ISP. It is maxed at 600kB/sec and everything is fine except gmail and random website have issues but it comes and goes. Other computers on my network have no issues doing anything, when they do the speed drops for a brief moment. Just giving an update.