Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

UPC is the worst ISP for Deep Packet Inspection and throttling

24

Comments

  • #32
    mickoneill30
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,073 ✭✭✭mickoneill30


    Cuddlesworth wrote: »
    Difficult to find one that wouldn't get me banned.

    http://www.fileserve.com/file/T2heezJ/ubuntu-11.04-desktop-i386.iso

    That's interesting. On my home machine (UPC) I'm getting about 40Kb/s. Here in work (BT I think). I'm getting 250Kb/s.
    If I download the same ISO at home from Ubuntu I get about 2.2MB/s

    Trace from my PC at home.

    tracert www.fileserve.com

    Tracing route to www.fileserve.com [209.222.23.221]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:

    1 14 ms 14 ms 11 ms
    2 43 ms 24 ms 9 ms
    3 24 ms 25 ms 42 ms
    4 43 ms 23 ms 22 ms 84.116.238.38
    5 41 ms 39 ms 26 ms uk-lon01b-rd1-xe-1-1-2.aorta.net [84.116.132.45]

    6 22 ms 25 ms 22 ms 84.116.133.230
    7 26 ms 30 ms 21 ms ldn-b5-link.telia.net [213.248.96.89]
    8 26 ms 23 ms 23 ms ldn-bb2-link.telia.net [80.91.249.181]
    9 96 ms 97 ms 220 ms nyk-bb2-link.telia.net [80.91.248.254]
    10 104 ms 94 ms 98 ms nyk-b2-link.telia.net [80.91.247.200]
    11 104 ms 102 ms 98 ms choopa-ic-138364-nyk-b2.c.telia.net [213.248.83.
    126]
    12 94 ms 96 ms 98 ms vl12-c58-c6-1.ewr3.choopa.net [66.55.128.190]
    13 103 ms 95 ms 98 ms 209.222.7.130
    14 98 ms 94 ms 95 ms 209.222.7.134
    15 107 ms 96 ms 121 ms 209.222.23.221

    Trace complete.


  • #33
    M.J.M.C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 949 ✭✭✭M.J.M.C


    That website has a premium and a free service, with the premium service being quicker.

    Given the above point, and the below point - this thread has failed to deliver any solid proof on its title.

    Fair play to Jason for confirming this so quickly.
    UPC: Jason wrote: »
    Guys

    Just wanted to set the record straight for anyone interested.

    UPC do NOT do this - you can take this as an official response.

    Regards

    Jason



    __________________
    If you want to order new products from us and get a voucher for €50 through this boards offer, (and free activation of product) just click through this link http://www.upc.ie/boardsoffer/ (Please see the terms & conditions)

    - For all customer service queries, please contact 1908.

    **I am not authorised to comment in general threads without approval***


  • #34
    MrVestek
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,233 ✭✭✭MrVestek


    Guys it could be any hop along the way that is affecting your traffic in some way shape or form.

    Traffic from an Eircom connection or a UPC connection isn't going to take the same route to reach it's destination, therefore presenting the appearance that one connection is throttling where the other is not. ANY node along the way could be throttling bittorrent data using DPI.

    That said I worked for an ISP once upon a time that swore blind to it's customers and it's employees that it did not employ any kind of traffic shaping whatsoever... until I found out that they did and that everybody was being lied to. They were using a few of these to do so: http://www.arbornetworks.com/arbor-eseries-deep-packet-inspection-dpi.html

    So whilst Jason may be perfectly right in what he's saying and may believe it and may be the 'official response'... it doesn't mean that he's not being lied to like I was at the time.

    Food for thought.


  • #35
    mickoneill30
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,073 ✭✭✭mickoneill30


    M.J.M.C wrote: »
    That website has a premium and a free service, with the premium service being quicker.

    I tried the same link using the two different ISPs. UPC was 40Kb/s (coincidentally very similar to Cuddlesworths result). My work was 250Kb/s.
    I don't have an account with Fileserve so I was using the free service for both downloads.

    Considering Cuddlesworth has tried Smart, IBB & Eircom and gotten faster speeds to me it looks like something with UPC. Yes we all take different routes to sites on the internet but if it's consistently slow for UPC users the only explanations I can think of are

    1: Something in UPCs end either faulty or restricting traffic.
    2: Fileserve are throttling UPC users. Which is a possibility too. UPC are the fastest ISP in Ireland. It's possible Fileserve saw a lot of traffic going to UPC and turned it down. That explanation is not as likely if the same result is seen with multiple file hosters.
    3: It's a problem with one of the hops near UPC.

    If it's a route issue like Achilles says maybe someone more technical can give us the commands so we can put static routes to Fileserve for a test. Cuddlesworth posted the hops from Eircom which work OK for him. Could we put in static routes to use the same route once we break out of UPCs network. This is beyond my knowledge, so I've no idea.


  • #36
    M.J.M.C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 949 ✭✭✭M.J.M.C


    With all due respect, many of your points would be described as very vague at best and not technically sound.

    I will wait till someone posts some solid technical proof.

    This thread is concentrating on one website by the looks of it.

    Any protocol I've used, I've never seen any throttling. At anytime.
    I'm open to be proved wrong, but want some solid facts,


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    mickoneill30
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,073 ✭✭✭mickoneill30


    M.J.M.C wrote: »
    Any protocol I've used, I've never seen any throttling. At anytime.
    I'm open to be proved wrong, but want some solid facts,

    So for the link Cuddlesworth posted above, that's working at full speed for you?
    The guy said hotfile, megaupload & fileserve seem to be slow for him. You hardly want links for all three. Either he's having the problem he described or he's making it up and just able to provide one link to back him up.


  • #38
    Sudsy86
    Registered Users Posts: 129 ✭✭Sudsy86


    Routing is easily change by altering DNS settings, for example use Goggles DNS

    Primary 8.8.8.8
    Secondary 8.8.4.4


  • #39
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,995 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    M.J.M.C wrote: »
    With all due respect, many of your points would be described as very vague at best and not technically sound.

    There is nothing vauge about it. My 100mb UPC connection can provide me with close to 100mb of traffic from heanet. When going to a Asian Filehoster the best speed I can get is around 40kbps per connection. I can test the same link on multiple lines from multiple ISPs at once and can hit full speed on all but the UPC line.

    How much more technical would you like it?
    M.J.M.C wrote: »
    I will wait till someone posts some solid technical proof.

    I'll pop onto TOR this evening and get better speeds again. Like I've done in the past when I wanted something quickly.
    M.J.M.C wrote: »
    This thread is concentrating on one website by the looks of it.

    Because its popular. So is Hotfile and Megaupload. Its why they are throttled.
    M.J.M.C wrote: »
    Any protocol I've used, I've never seen any throttling.

    Good for you. Although I get the impression from your posts you wouldn't know where to begin if you did have a problem.


  • #40
    M.J.M.C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 949 ✭✭✭M.J.M.C


    mickoneill30 wrote: »
    So for the link Cuddlesworth posted above, that's working at full speed for you?

    Why would it download at full speed? I don't have a premium account which makes this whole conversation fairly poor.

    Saying download speeds are slow from sites that often require you to pay money to download faster, well....enough said.

    I've a dedicated server in france and can constantly get 100Mb down from it anytime, no issues with any protocol.
    I've seen no issues EVER of throttling and UPC have confirmed this too.


    Achilles made a good point, and if someone has some GOOD proof to show UPC are then by all means show it.
    Some good technical proof. Not hearsay or complaints about one or two websites.

    I might make a thread "UPC is the BEST ISP for not doing Deep Packet Inspection and throttling" and wait to be proven wrong.

    This thread title so far has been misleading as we haven't seen any proof and titles like this can give UPC a bad name.

    Thanks


  • #41
    PogMoThoin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,874 ✭✭✭✭PogMoThoin


    Sudsy86 wrote: »
    Routing is easily change by altering DNS settings, for example use Goggles DNS

    Primary 8.8.8.8
    Secondary 8.8.4.4

    That would make zero difference, Dns doesn't specify a route, it just resolves hostnames to ip addresses. If the ip is not directly connected to a router, it passes the packet to the nexthop router specified in its routing table (which can change).


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,995 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    Sudsy86 wrote: »
    Routing is easily change by altering DNS settings, for example use Goggles DNS

    Primary 8.8.8.8
    Secondary 8.8.4.4

    Routing isn't changed by altering the DNS servers. You can change routing by either changing ISP's or using a proxy server to force your traffic along another route.


  • #43
    M.J.M.C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 949 ✭✭✭M.J.M.C


    Cuddlesworth wrote: »
    Good for you. Although I get the impression from your posts you wouldn't know where to begin if you did have a problem.

    My degree in computer networking and cisco qualifications beg to differ.

    Still waiting to see some proof.


  • #44
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,995 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    M.J.M.C wrote: »
    Why would it download at full speed? I don't have a premium account which makes this whole conversation fairly poor.

    Fileservce offer 200kbps to unpaid users. And would you believe it, I just got 200kbps when using it as a free user.
    M.J.M.C wrote: »
    Saying download speeds are slow from sites that often require you to pay money to download faster, well....enough said.

    Regardless of premium or free, it caps itself to 40kbps. Everytime regardless and has done for the last six months.
    M.J.M.C wrote: »
    I've a dedicated server in france and can constantly get 100Mb down from it anytime, no issues with any protocol.
    I've seen no issues EVER of throttling and UPC have confirmed this too.

    Your dedicated server in France is not comparable to a Filehoster in Asia.
    M.J.M.C wrote: »
    Achilles made a good point, and if someone has some GOOD proof to show UPC are then by all means show it.
    Some good technical proof. Not hearsay or complaints about one or two websites.

    I'm beginning to get the impression that no matter what I say you will deny it. Have you got a vested interest to declare?
    M.J.M.C wrote: »
    I might make a thread "UPC is the BEST ISP for not doing Deep Packet Inspection and throttling" and wait to be proven wrong.

    And I'll post the above fileserve link and we will see how many upc users can get above 100kbps. I'm going to go out on a limb and say 0.
    M.J.M.C wrote: »
    This thread title so far has been misleading as we haven't seen any proof and titles like this can give UPC a bad name.

    Thanks

    I'm back to my vested interest question.


  • #45
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,995 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    M.J.M.C wrote: »
    My degree in computer networking and cisco qualifications beg to differ.

    Still waiting to see some proof.

    If you did have a degree in computer networking and Cisco qualifications you wouldn't compare a 100mb server in France with the current no1 filehoster based in Asia.


  • #46
    mickoneill30
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,073 ✭✭✭mickoneill30


    M.J.M.C wrote: »
    Why would it download at full speed? I don't have a premium account which makes this whole conversation fairly poor.

    Are you reading my posts or am I typing them in a different language.

    I don't have a premium account.

    I try with UPC. I get 40Kb/s
    I try the SAME LINK with a FREE ACCOUNT in work and get 250Kb/s.

    When you tried it (you have tried it right) what speed do you get? I know it's a free account but I'm sure with all your qualifications you're not arguing about something without having even had the courtesy to try it for yourself.

    What makes the whole conversation pretty poor is people not trying simple steps but continuing to argue because they've a degree in computer science. You're waiting on proof but won't try the link yourself. I won't bother replying again to stupid posts.


  • #47
    M.J.M.C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 949 ✭✭✭M.J.M.C


    No vested :)

    I'll test the link when I get home, i'm interested to see & test it for myself.

    But from my own use, I've never seen anything throttled.
    However I don't use these two websites.

    I'm sure even if members of boards were able to show upc we were all having an issue with websites x y and z being slow, they would look into it.

    If we had more people saying they were only getting 40kbps from this site that would be helpful, again like I said i'll check it out when I get home.

    Again not a vested interest, just a happy customer.


  • #48
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,995 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    M.J.M.C wrote: »
    No vested :)

    I'll test the link when I get home, i'm interested to see & test it for myself.

    But from my own use, I've never seen anything throttled.
    However I don't use these two websites.

    I'm sure even if members of boards were able to show upc we were all having an issue with websites x y and z being slow, they would look into it.

    If we had more people saying they were only getting 40kbps from this site that would be helpful, again like I said i'll check it out when I get home.

    Again not a vested interest, just a happy customer.

    From a ISP point of view, it makes financial sense to limit the traffic going from continent to continent when your paying for the amount that's used. And for the traffic carriers who have to pass it on. And both UPC and eircom travel across two continents with two oceans to span.

    Even if it wasn't UPC but their Telia links in the States, its still their customers traffic and their responsibility.


  • #49
    mickoneill30
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,073 ✭✭✭mickoneill30


    M.J.M.C wrote: »
    No vested :)

    I'll test the link when I get home, i'm interested to see & test it for myself.

    But from my own use, I've never seen anything throttled.
    However I don't use these two websites.

    I'm sure even if members of boards were able to show upc we were all having an issue with websites x y and z being slow, they would look into it.

    If we had more people saying they were only getting 40kbps from this site that would be helpful, again like I said i'll check it out when I get home.

    Again not a vested interest, just a happy customer.

    Yeah, well me too. I've no problem with torrents. And I don't use the other file sharing sites. I had thought it was all in Cuddlesworths head when I read his posts :p
    It is just weird that with multiple ISPs working OK, users using UPC seem to be getting reproducible results.
    He said he got 40 - 120Kbs with UPC. When I tried UPC I got exactly 40Kbs. With BT (or whoever my work uses) I got 250Kbs. I tried both at the same time (I can access my home PC from work) and I tried them both twice.


  • #50
    mickoneill30
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,073 ✭✭✭mickoneill30


    Cuddlesworth wrote: »
    Even if it wasn't UPC but their Telia links in the States, its still their customers traffic and their responsibility.

    I had a look in their AUP earlier on. Section 8 seems to have you covered.
    http://www.upc.ie/termsandconditions/acceptableusagepolicy/

    The Jason guy said they don't do this though. I'd imagine it's only in there to cover ass.


  • #51
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,995 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    mickoneill30 wrote: »
    I had a look in their AUP earlier on. Section 8 seems to have you covered.
    http://www.upc.ie/termsandconditions/acceptableusagepolicy/

    The Jason guy said they don't do this though. I'd imagine it's only in there to cover ass.

    I'd be surprised if any ISP didn't have it covered in their agreement. Doesn't mean I'm going to let them come on and steadfast deny it.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,995 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    mickoneill30 wrote: »
    I had thought it was all in Cuddlesworths head when I read his posts :p

    I'm in a fairly unique position in that I have access to a large number of connections and socialise with a large number of people who would be heavy downloaders. Couple that with the large number of threads appearing here which have four basic facts in each, slow speed, good speedtest results, Asian filehosters and UPC.


  • #53
    Sudsy86
    Registered Users Posts: 129 ✭✭Sudsy86


    PogMoThoin wrote: »
    That would make zero difference, Dns doesn't specify a route, it just resolves hostnames to ip addresses. If the ip is not directly connected to a router, it passes the packet to the nexthop router specified in its routing table (which can change).

    This may be wrong!!!

    But does it not technically add a HOP to the routing which requests the Google server to resolve the host name hence the connection request now comes from Google and Not UPC, If a particular server is restricting access or reducing access due to the requestor would this not resolve the issue with the reduction in traffic(unless traffic through google is restricted also...

    That has always been my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong...


  • #54
    wush06
    Registered Users Posts: 689 ✭✭✭wush06


    Im only getting 26/kb download from that link on upc 50MB.


  • #55
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,995 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    Sudsy86 wrote: »
    This may be wrong!!!

    But does it not technically add a HOP to the routing which requests the Google server to resolve the host name hence the connection request now comes from Google and Not UPC, If a particular server is restricting access or reducing access due to the requestor would this not resolve the issue with the reduction in traffic(unless traffic through google is restricted also...

    That has always been my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong...

    You request the IP of the website, DNS responds with it, the packets get sent to the IP given. Since every DNS should give the same IP and none of the actual traffic to the IP is sent through the DNS server, it doesn't make a difference.


  • #56
    PogMoThoin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,874 ✭✭✭✭PogMoThoin


    Sudsy86 wrote: »
    This may be wrong!!!

    But does it not technically add a HOP to the routing which requests the Google server to resolve the host name hence the connection request now comes from Google and Not UPC, If a particular server is restricting access or reducing access due to the requestor would this not resolve the issue with the reduction in traffic(unless traffic through google is restricted also...

    That has always been my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong...

    No, what you think is completely wrong. Your traffic does not route through a dns server. Dns is just a lookup and reply. First your pc sends a dns request to the dns server, to get the entry for the ip address to match the hostname, then when it receives its response from the dns server it sends the packets to the next router marked with that ip as destination ip address.


  • #57
    Simi
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,874 ✭✭✭Simi


    I get download speeds of ~30kb/s when downloading from fileserve, filesonic, megaupload and hotfile as well as some of the newer lesser known hosters.

    I tried both filesonic and fileserve premium for a month and had to increase to between 8-12 the number of connections per file to max out my 25mb connection someting you can't do with a non-premium account making these filehosts all but useless for free downloading at the moment.

    Rapidshare, wupload and netload seem to be unaffected. It's possible that this is unintentional, as asian servers have always been a bit of an issue on UPC.

    I remember being unable to update Samsung kies last year, as it was unable to connect to Samsungs server in Korea. This only resolved itself when Samsung set up a download server in europe.


  • #58
    M.J.M.C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 949 ✭✭✭M.J.M.C


    Tested from home - 20kB/s - 30kB/s (UPC 100Mb)
    Tested from work - 260kB/s - 270kB/s (BT)


  • #59
    mark17j
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 507 ✭✭✭mark17j


    1554135389.png

    This Morning's speed results, I Can't even browse the net.
    This usually happens after 11pm some evenings and full speed is not restored until after 9 -10 in the am.. I strongly believe they are slowing my connection to snail speed for 12hrs straight on some days, and I don't understand why?


  • #60
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,995 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    mark17j wrote: »
    1554135389.png

    This Morning's speed results, I Can't even browse the net.
    This usually happens after 11pm some evenings and full speed is not restored until after 9 -10 in the am.. I strongly believe they are slowing my connection to snail speed for 12hrs straight on some days, and I don't understand why?

    That's neither DPI nor throttling. Its just a slow connection. I would start with talking to UPC about it.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    mark17j
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 507 ✭✭✭mark17j


    Cuddlesworth wrote: »
    That's neither DPI nor throttling. Its just a slow connection. I would start with talking to UPC about it.
    I think UPC are cutting bandwidth to some customers at specific times to ease congestion on lines.This slow up occurs every 3 -4 days in my case, always starts at 11pm on the nose, and when this happens, full speed will not return until 9-10am the next day.Happens so regularly and at these specific times, that I have it off by heart at this stage.

    All ok now, Hopefully my connection doesn't die at 11pm This Evening again.

    1554457773.png


Advertisement