P2P (Bittorrent etc) configuration & use discussion...ongoing (Only place to post!)

Mmcd

Can someone who knows properly and isnt just assuming : what is the official stance in Ireland for the downloading of copyrighted material for personal use. I always thought it was illegal but saw that its legal in Spain and Holland so was wondering!

Mmcd

Mmcd wrote: »

Can someone who knows properly and isnt just assuming : what is the official stance in Ireland for the downloading of copyrighted material for personal use. I always thought it was illegal but saw that its legal in Spain and Holland so was wondering!

Its illegal unless you have paid for the media then it is legal to download a backup for personal use.

Mmcd

david7536 wrote: »

Its illegal unless you have paid for the media then it is legal to download a backup for personal use.

Source link?

mikep

Hi

Don't know if this is the right place for this but registration at demonoid is open at the mo...

mikep

mikep wrote: »

Hi

Don't know if this is the right place for this but registration at demonoid is open at the mo...

Yeah! Now i can sign up to a "private" tracker that has more mpaa and riaa agents on every torrent than there are fish in the sea! So we dont get letters from isp's here yet but be sure your ip is logged for future "usage", just a heads up for the uninitiated. Mininova is safer.

Zenith74

Hi Guys,

I know there are a few threads on this already, I've read most of them I think, but none seemed to come to any conclusion as to whether UPC are actually doing any throttling/shaping of Bittorrent traffic or if it is just bad settings on the user end.

I just moved into a new house. I was on EsatBT 7Mb ADSL in the old place and got the expected 700k download speeds regularly, now I'm on UPC 10Mb and very rarely getting over 50k. It went up to 200k during the night at one point, but basically it's crawling along. I'm using uTorrent (also tested with BitTornado) and have all the relevant port forwarding, TCP/IP limits increased in XP etc. As I said I literally picked up my PC from the old house and went to the new, so any PC side issues are very unlikely.

Some info. The router we got is the new Cisco EPC2425. All other downloads are flying, I just downloaded from the nVidia site at 1000k consistently. Bittorrent downloads were slow from the minute the UPC engineer left, so we're not on a blacklist. I've limited the upload speed so we're not choking the connection. We're in the Sandyford area.

Having said all that, maybe this is a problem from my end, or with the Cisco or whatever. So is anybody out there downloading at full speed using Bittorrent on UPC? If you are could you post and let us know what router you have from UPC, what BT client you're using and any other relevant info.


Thanks!

Zenith74

mod- I was kinda hoping to keep this post away from the hundreds of questions on how to configure for Bittorrent and actually get to the bottom of the UPC issue so we could then start doing something about it?

vibe666

IMHO yes they are, in the evenings to maintain the integrity of the network (i.e. not have torrenters flood it when everyone else is likely to be browsing), but afaik, not at other times as of yet.

this is just my own observation from what i've been reading here and my own experience, so don't take it as the gospel truth as I'm not always right on these things, it's just my opinion.

how you are affected very much depends on how you have everything configured and to some extent even what torrent client you're using.

I've tweaked the buts out of azureus and am still just finding it very average in terms of performance, but unfortunately, features wise it can't be beaten (in linux anyways).

speed wise, transmission is the best i've seen and seems to be immune to whatever throttling upc are employing for some reason. below is a screengrab of my router's bandwidth monitoring page from a while ago one night. it was whilst downloading 2 350mb divx's from a public torrent tracker late one night (after midnight afaik) on ntl 20mbps using transmission.



not sure if they were throttling at that point in the evening or not, but i've noticed anything up to approx 200% faster download speeds using transmission in the evenings over azureus, and maybe 100% faster speeds at other times.

just a shame it doesn't have the other features that i'm used to in azureus, or i'd drop it altogether.

Tea_Bag

Opera started running VERY VERY slow recently, and i couldnt understand why, because I have the UPC 10mb connection. (through wireless) it felt like i was back in the 14.4kbps dialup days.

after closing uTorrent (which isnt DL'ing/uploading anything), a few minutes later Opera is back to normal speeds.

(this has never been a problem with the 2 running simultaneously)

could i have accidently messed with a setting in utorrent or opera that screws them up?

more info:
they're not running on the same port.

even typing (example into this thread) causes a lag between the keyboard key hit and it appearing on screen.

i have port forwarding for utorrent @ port 31001

pg2 is not blocking HTTP

ehm what else. Opera is upto date...

thanks!


TB

jor el

Check your torrent upload speed limit. If it's unlimited, or too high, it'll choke your download speed. Check with an alternate browser too.

Tea_Bag

checked IE, and its the same as Opera.

Upload speed is always limited to 15kb/s, but isnt that irrelivant when im not seeding or anything?

more info if it helps, global max connections is set to 250, with max peers per torrent set to 50.


thanks for moving the thread, wasnt sure if it was more a BB issue or P2P.

TB

cpu-dude

Tea_Bag wrote: »

Opera started running VERY VERY slow recently, and i couldnt understand why, because I have the UPC 10mb connection. (through wireless) it felt like i was back in the 14.4kbps dialup days.

after closing uTorrent (which isnt DL'ing/uploading anything), a few minutes later Opera is back to normal speeds.

(this has never been a problem with the 2 running simultaneously)

could i have accidently messed with a setting in utorrent or opera that screws them up?

more info:
they're not running on the same port.

even typing (example into this thread) causes a lag between the keyboard key hit and it appearing on screen.

i have port forwarding for utorrent @ port 31001

pg2 is not blocking HTTP

ehm what else. Opera is upto date...

thanks!


TB

Typing slowly doesn't happen because of poor BB speeds, that's something running on your computer causing it to slow down. I suggest running a full AV scan as well as a Spyware scan.

Johnboy1951

david7536 wrote: »

In the most basic terms, port forwarding opens a port or range of ports on your router which will allow peers to connect to your pc in order upload/download from you. You then tell utorrent to use that port for incoming connections.
.......

I have been searching for the answer to the question about port forwarding, but am still a little unsure .....

With no ports opened/forwarded, using a torrent client to download say an ISO of a Linux distribution, I also allow my client to upload at whatever rate I decide as max, others are able to connect and use what I make available.
I seem stuck on how opening a port would do anything other than allow others access to my PC through that port without my torrent app making the upload available.

I suppose I look at it like this .... with the torrent app running and my permission to upload the port/s are then effectively open as the torrent app is listening on the port for a connection.
So I fail to see how having the port open permanently is any advantage. I see a lot of disadvantages, mostly from a security point of view.

Sorry to have to ask this question again, but I am not presently seeing any great theoretical difference ...... unless I wish to permanently run a server on my machine, serving up torrent files. No I have not forwarded any port as yet, and am unlikely to do so unless I can understand the advantage of doing so. I do not want a permanent server open to the 'wild' running on my PC.

Hopefully someone can enlighten me and I can see the reasons behind opening a port or a range of ports.

Thanks for the help

Zenith74

with the torrent app running and my permission to upload the port/s are then effectively open as the torrent app is listening on the port for a connection

It isn't listening because the port isn't making it through NAT. BitTorrent can download/upload fine with no inbound ports forwarded provided it can make outbound connections. Your client connects to the tracker, gets a list of other peers in the swarm and starts to connect to them to get data you're interested in. When you connect to another peer a two way TCP session is opened and traffic goes in both directions, you upload and download. The port used in this case is random and unrelated to the whole bittorrent port forwarding discussion.

The port forwarding is done to allow inbound connections to your bt client from other peers in the swarm only. Once the connection is made on the predefined port number the TCP session is offloaded to a different random port. Your IP is listed on the tracker so other clients will constantly try to communicate with you, if you don't have the correct port forwarded they won't get through.

So basically without the port forwarded you are relying on your client to connect to other peers, you won't get other peers connecting to you. This tends to limit speed dramatically, because to the other clients in the swarm you don't look like an 'appealing' peer to deal with.

So yeah by all means don't forward the port, you're not doing any damage, but you are definitely limiting your maximum speed. As for security again this is up to you, but bear in mind a forwarded port on its own is not really that dangerous, there needs to be an unsecure piece of software listening on the other end for it to be a risk.

Johnboy1951

Zenith74 thank you for the quick reply. Much appreciated.

So basically without the port forwarded you are relying on your client to connect to other peers, you won't get other peers connecting to you. This tends to limit speed dramatically, because to the other clients in the swarm you don't look like an 'appealing' peer to deal with.

OK, this is where I am misunderstanding things.
I understood that while the client is running, a connection is maintained on the default port awaiting an incoming connection.

Of course if the client does not continue to listen on the default port then what you have explained in understandable.

But if the client continues to connect to the default port then would not everyone in the swarm be able to connect to the PC? They may be told there is no further capacity available, but would be able to make a connection?

Thanks for the help.

Zenith74

Your client actually never gets to listen on the default port because it is not coming through your firewall. When your client decides to connect to another peer it uses a random port number (assigned by the Windows TCP/IP stack, lets say it might be 32653) to create an outbound connection to the peer (to their published open port, say 6881). As soon as the connection is established the peer will offload the TCP connection to a different random port number at their end (say 21332). So you've now got a TCP session between port 32653 on your end and 21332 on their end. The known port is just used momentarily to establish the connection, this is how TCP works. A TCP port can only talk to one other peer at a time, hence the reason the session is handed off by Windows to another port quickly.

Hopefully that makes sense or answers the question? The best thing to do is do some reading up on how TCP sessions work (assuming you're interested that is ).

Johnboy1951

Zenith74 wrote: »

Your client actually never gets to listen on the default port because it is not coming through your firewall. When your client decides to connect to another peer it uses a random port number (assigned by the Windows TCP/IP stack, lets say it might be 32653) to create an outbound connection to the peer (to their published open port, say 6881). As soon as the connection is established the peer will offload the TCP connection to a different random port number at their end (say 21332). So you've now got a TCP session between port 32653 on your end and 21332 on their end. The known port is just used momentarily to establish the connection, this is how TCP works. A TCP port can only talk to one other peer at a time, hence the reason the session is handed off by Windows to another port quickly.

Hopefully that makes sense or answers the question? The best thing to do is do some reading up on how TCP sessions work (assuming you're interested that is ).

Thanks again.

It wasn't the handing off of ports that confused me, it was my expectations of the behaviour of the torrent client.

Thanks for the explanation/s.

I will go looking for further info about torrent clients and how they operate ...... if you have any particular link you think might be useful I would appreciate it.

Thanks again.

Stugots

Tried to help out a friend using BT broadband. For some reason, piratebay.org is now blocked. Can't even ping it - name is not resolved. I turned off windows avast and PG2, no effect. I'm not at the PC in question now, but any suggestions on how to proceed? Would changing the DNS server help? What alternate DNS could I use (default is whatever came with BT modem setup)?

p15574

Stugots wrote: »

Tried to help out a friend using BT broadband. For some reason, piratebay.org is now blocked. Can't even ping it - name is not resolved. I turned off windows avast and PG2, no effect. I'm not at the PC in question now, but any suggestions on how to proceed? Would changing the DNS server help? What alternate DNS could I use (default is whatever came with BT modem setup)?

Could you ping it from a different ISP to find out the IP address and then try the IP address?
I get it as 192.121.86.15

Stugots

p15574 wrote: »

Could you ping it from a different ISP to find out the IP address and then try the IP address?
I get it as 192.121.86.15

Yes - will try that. Actually I also use BT and I'm in the same housing estate and exchange and have no problems. I will check my DNS server, get the pirate bay IP address and try a ping and tracert from the problem PC.

moonboy52

also try http://www.opendns.com/ if you want to use a different DNS

Jackinkul

Hi,

I recently signed up for NTL 10MB broadband and am using the Scientific Atlanta router.

I find I'm rarely getting the upload I'm supposed to have when torrenting with private tracker sites. So the big improvements in my ratio at my favourite sites I was expecting hasn't materialised :-(.

I'm using utorrent and am connectable. Occasionally I get 100KB upload but most of the time it's more like 20KB! - especially during office hours, though no consistent pattern is obvious to me - less even than I was getting on eircom.

Changing the preference settings in utorrent in respect of encryption, etc. doesn't seem to make any difference.

I'm sure other NTL customers must have encountered the same problem. I would be grateful if you could pass on any ways to improve the upload performance in utorrent you've come up with.

Thanking you.

PS I was redirected here from a now-closed separate thread I began. The information I want may be somewhere in the 44 pages of this thread. I think, however, it might be helpful if someone familiar with it could summarise the best advice offered not just for me but for the predictable line of new NTL customers behind me.

Jackinkul

Excuse the double post, but it's been a while.

I think the fact is that people like me who predominently use private tracker sites and are hoping to get a big lift in their ratios from NTL's advertised 1-1.5 MB upload on their 10-20 MB packages are going to be sadly disapointed.

You only get c20 KBs upload due to their traffic shaping policies for most of the time. (I stay up late, so I've seen it's performance at all hours.) You'd be better off NOT switching from you current supplier.

The good download speeds NTL offer suggest use of Usenet, etc., but that involves extra expense.

If you're boasting to your friends about the great upload you're going to get on an NTL package, you'll end up having to rent seedbox time to disguise the crappy upload performance you're actually getting. Be warned!

---

I Married A Kulchie!

Zenith74

Jackinkul - What router did you get from UPC? As per my post a few pages back I moved house and went from EsatBT to UPC. I had all the ports open and knew there wasn't a problem with my PC as it was doing 700kb/s when on EsatBT. On UPC I was only getting 20-50 down and similar up.
Last week I disabled just about everything on the UPC Cisco in terms of uPNP, firewall etc etc. I also did the TCP session change on my PC though that made no difference last time. Anyway I can now upload at 70k solid and am downloading regularly from 500-700k though it peaked at 1000k yesterday evening. Unfortunately I made a few changes at once so don't know what did it, but I'm pretty sure it was all the settings on the Cisco to be honest.

Jackinkul

As far as I can tell, the only thing stopping me from getting the 1 MB upload NTL advertised is NTL's traffic shaping policy. When they relax it my upload can go up to 1.1 MB, so my configuration isn't preventing me, it's NTL themselves.

They say they're keeping their policy under review. More of their customers need to post on sites about their dissatisfaction, warning potential customers about NTL. That's the only thing will make them think. They have me locked into a 1 year contract, so they know I'm not going anywhere. I only wish I'd known in advance.

dunworth1

upc only throttle until midnight

Mmcd

For anyone thats having trouble with throttling you could try this https://www.furk.net/

Furk is not your regular torrent site. Not only does it function as a meta-search engine, but you can also download ‘torrents’ via Furk’s servers using HTTP. And it doesn’t stop there. Furk holds these downloads in a searchable database that anyone can use, turning the site into a kind of mashup between BitTorrent and Rapidshare.

FurkIn the regular BitTorrent downloading scenario we would go to a torrent site such as The Pirate Bay or Mininova, select a torrent and download it. Once that torrent starts running in our client, connections are made to other people using the same technique and the content is downloaded and shared with and via those ‘peers’.

This type of file-sharing is very effective - indeed, it’s what BitTorrent is all about. However, there are those who would prefer to stop or hinder such P2P traffic - certain ISPs take measures to identify BitTorrent protocol traffic and slow it down with a process known as ‘throttling’.

While Furk can simply be used as a torrent meta-search engine to trawl other sites for .torrent files, to combat throttling (and privacy concerns) Furk bills part of its service as a ‘BitTorrent Proxy’. This means that instead of searching for a torrent file and downloading in the usual manner via the BitTorrent protocol, instead Furk itself joins the swarm in question and downloads the material directly to their own servers.

Once completed, users can simply download that material directly from Furk’s super-fast network using the HTTP protocol in their regular web browser. Identical to standard web traffic, HTTP generally isn’t throttled by ISPs, allowing the user to download more quickly than with throttled BitTorrent. In the less likely event that an ISP tries to slow down HTTP, downloads can be made from Furk using HTTPs.

“By default all links are HTTPs,” Furk admin told TorrentFreak. “It helps to avoid content filtering systems and increase the level of anonymity. Also for every link the user can choose an alternative link with a non-standard port.” This element of the service is only available to premium users at a few euros per month but free users can still have fun with Furk.

It’s also possible to upload your own files and videos to the service, but Furk has another much more interesting trick up its sleeve - and it’s available to non-premium users. Instead of just keeping the content on their servers for material requested by you, Furk keeps the content requested by everyone. This means that Furk has a growing database of material culled from torrent sites, but offered via direct and immediate HTTP download. A search for ‘aXXo’ shows hundreds of releases, mostly available for direct download. Think of it like Rapidshare, but with a BitTorrent backend.

“Speed for premium users is unlimited. All of the servers are on a 1Gps network and we have plenty of unused bandwidth,” Furk admin told TorrentFreak. “Free downloads are currently limited only by restricting the number of download sessions, so download managers can be used only with premium accounts.”

However, even with no premium account, some impressive speeds can be achieved. We managed decent transfers from The Netherlands, Russia and the US, before finally maxing out a 20mbit Hungarian connection. It remains to be seen if these speeds can be maintained once the masses start hitting the service - probably not, since there needs to be something to draw users to the premium service, but time will tell.

http://torrentfreak.com/furk-the-direct-download-bittorrent-proxy-090615/

Zenith74

dunworth1 - That certainly hasn't been my experience, speeds are pretty consistent. But then they may be doing it different in certain areas.

Jackinkul - Roughly where are you in Dublin? I am completely maxxing out my upload all day on UPC, the graph in uTorrent shows a practially straight line on the upload. Again they might be doing it different by area, depending on how busy an area is. Having said that I was 100% convinced config wasn't my problem (I work in the IT industry dealing with stuff like this regularly), until I found out it was .

Donimo

Zenith74 wrote: »

I am completely maxxing out my upload all day on UPC, the graph in uTorrent shows a practially straight line on the upload. <...snip...> Having said that I was 100% convinced config wasn't my problem (I work in the IT industry dealing with stuff like this regularly), until I found out it was .

Zenith74, could you tell us what actual upload speed you are achieving, and would you mind sharing what configuration issue you discovered?

Thanks,
Donimo

Zenith74

Zenith74 wrote: »

Anyway I can now upload at 70k solid and am downloading regularly from 500-700k though it peaked at 1000k yesterday evening.

I'll get some screen prints from uTorrent tonight. I have the upload limited to 70k to stop it flooding the connection so I'm not sure what it would peak at if let run wild.

As I said above I didn't write down the changes I made unfortunately. I made the change to the max TCP sessions from 10 to 50 (Google for this for more info) but don't believe that was the problem as it was not needed with this PC when I was on EsatBT. The next thing I did was disable as much as possible on the Cisco UPC supplied. I turned off the firewall, uPNP etc etc. Before that I was seeing an average of about 50k downloads with an absolute max of 200k for a few seconds one night. Downloads now tend to stay between 300-500k but on good torrents regularly go to 700-800, and as I say peaked at 1000k the other night for a few minutes. None of this happens after midnight as I generally turn the PC off at night.