Torrent Slow

[gharknes]

torrent programs are not illegal before anyone decides to close this thread

Anyone else having download problems, my speed has dropped from 100kb to 5 since yesterday

[gharknes]

Right something very strange for all you IT gurus on this forum, my traceroute shows that my connection is being routed through a node with ip address 192.168.10.13 - this as you might think is not my local router, it is external and comes in at node number 4 of my routing, that is before it even gets to CAT Telecom, it suffers from 90% packet loss when pinged which would explain why my connection has dimminished to almost nothing, I suspect this is some sort of monitor that my connection is being diverted too taking packets of data and disrupting my connection rate with P2P software

anyone else have any thoughts on this ?

[A_Traveller]

You might want to review this thread, though I'm not sure when this will occur.

P2P proxy

[gharknes]

interesting post but not reletive to my problem, the ip address I posted is reserved for private networks and cannot be assigned to the WWW, this means that my connection is being routed from my router straight into a private network behind a firwall into some devices on a local network, packet loss to this is 90% making P2P useless.

[monty]

What ISP you use?

I've never seen devices on the 192.168 range behind my ISP's gateway! This IP range is normally never used for equipment at ISP level!

If you do an online check for your IP, do you get the same address as assigned to your modem/router by the ISP's dhcp server?

Find your IP here: http://www.digmyip.net/

[gharknes]

yes I've never seen this either, my guess is my traffic is being routed through some internal equipment that is introducing the 90% packet loss which also ties in with the speed reductions on P2P software from 100k to about 5-10k, my ip shows as 117.47.2#.### which is quite normal registered in CA USA, the traceroute jumps from my modem straight to the USA, don't understand any of this, here's the route

NeoTrace Version 3.2 Trace Results

Target: www.yahoo.com

Date: Tue Jul 31 15:21:41 2007

Nodes: 19

Node Data

Node Net Reg IP Address Location Node Name

1 - - 192.168.1.2 12.933N, 100.883E me

2 1 - 192.168.1.1 Unknown my router

3 2 - 58.147.0.20 Unknown gateway

4 3 - 10.122.20.254 Unknown problem trace

5 1 - 192.168.10.13 Unknown problem trace

6 - - 0.0.0.0 Unknown No Response

7 2 - 58.147.0.51 Unknown

8 2 - 58.147.0.46 Unknown

9 4 - 202.47.254.161 Unknown

10 4 - 202.47.253.150 Unknown

11 4 - 202.47.253.217 Unknown

12 5 1 209.58.53.13 Los Angeles if-0-3.icore1.laa-losangeles.teleglobe.net

13 6 1 216.6.85.21 Los Angeles if-6-0-0-10.mcore4.laa-losangeles.teleglobe.net

14 6 1 216.6.86.9 Sunnyvale if-5-0.mcore4.pdi-paloalto.teleglobe.net

15 6 1 216.6.86.2 Sunnyvale if-7-0.core3.pdi-paloalto.teleglobe.net

16 7 1 207.45.196.90 Sunnyvale ix-5-0.core3.pdi-paloalto.teleglobe.net

17 8 2 216.115.107.51 Unknown g-0-0-0-p141.msr1.sp1.yahoo.com

18 9 2 209.131.32.17 Unknown te-8-1.bas-a1.sp1.yahoo.com

19 9 2 209.131.36.158 San Jose f1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com

Packet Data

Node High Low Avg Tot Lost

1 0 0 0 1 0

2 75 1 3 119 0

3 135 9 10 119 0

4 11 11 3 225 199

5 12 12 4 215 191

6 ---- ---- ---- 234 234

7 155 13 35 117 0

8 120 13 34 117 0

9 79 13 35 118 1

10 135 13 33 117 0

11 281 219 244 117 0

12 292 223 248 117 0

13 282 215 238 117 0

14 304 234 258 117 0

15 326 225 257 118 1

16 349 238 263 117 0

17 295 228 255 118 1

18 372 229 260 117 0

19 304 228 262 117 0

you can see the packet loss on nodes 4 and 5 and the private ip being used, my isp is TT&T maxnet, anyone else on maxnet have a route similar to this ?

Edited July 31, 2007 by gharknes

[gharknes]

anyone know if TT&T have technical support email address, talking on their support line about packet loss and ip addresses is a waste of time

Edited July 31, 2007 by gharknes

[A_Traveller]

As an advisory, my recollection is that MaxNet originally specified P2P as a non supported service for their domestic connexions. Indeed, if memory serves, a poster here scanned his agreement which noted that. Therefore you might want to concentrate on the loss issue without raising P2P specifically.

Regards

[gharknes]

That is what I have done, this type of issue will effect ip telephone and online gameing and I'm sure a few other things, I have sent an email to [email protected], don't know if I'll get any response

[InspectorGadget]

Did this start to happen about 9pm last night?

[gharknes]

yeh sounds about right, its back to normal now but I still get the packet loss at those 2 ip's so it seems they are not related.

[monty]

Problems not at MAxnet, my trace route does not show the funny 192.168.xxx.xxx IP after the gateway, everything seems to be stuck at the IIG (international Internet Gateway) of CAT, packet loss and pings of close to 1 sec on the IIG...

Also look here: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=133299

[gharknes]

GOT a message back that CAT had a problem with one of their international gateways, seems to be fixed now. Still think those ip's are really strange though.

[gharknes]

GOT a message back that CAT had a problem with one of their international gateways, seems to be fixed now. Still think those ip's are really strange though.

went down again earlier tonite and is back again now, they are either phucking me around or they do have a genuine problem

[Prasert]

....

my ip shows as 117.47.2#.### which is quite normal registered in CA USA

...

If you use a normal webpage (port 80), the IP address shown will very likely be the proxy servers IP address.

Try this url: http://checkip.dyndns.org:8245

....

1 - - 192.168.1.2 12.933N, 100.883E me

2 1 - 192.168.1.1 Unknown my router

3 2 - 58.147.0.20 Unknown gateway

4 3 - 10.122.20.254 Unknown problem trace

5 1 - 192.168.10.13 Unknown problem trace

6 - - 0.0.0.0 Unknown No Response

7 2 - 58.147.0.51 Unknown

8 2 - 58.147.0.46 Unknown

9 4 - 202.47.254.161 Unknown

10 4 - 202.47.253.150 Unknown

11 4 - 202.47.253.217 Unknown

12 5 1 209.58.53.13 Los Angeles if-0-3.icore1.laa-losangeles.teleglobe.net

13 6 1 216.6.85.21 Los Angeles if-6-0-0-10.mcore4.laa-losangeles.teleglobe.net

14 6 1 216.6.86.9 Sunnyvale if-5-0.mcore4.pdi-paloalto.teleglobe.net

15 6 1 216.6.86.2 Sunnyvale if-7-0.core3.pdi-paloalto.teleglobe.net

16 7 1 207.45.196.90 Sunnyvale ix-5-0.core3.pdi-paloalto.teleglobe.net

17 8 2 216.115.107.51 Unknown g-0-0-0-p141.msr1.sp1.yahoo.com

18 9 2 209.131.32.17 Unknown te-8-1.bas-a1.sp1.yahoo.com

19 9 2 209.131.36.158 San Jose f1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com

Now this is gonna be a wild guess, but it looks like the packets take an extra path between hops 3 en 7. Not only the 192.168.n.n network is private, but the 10.n.n.n network is well and that one is used in hop 4.

All ISPs use the private address range in their networks, but if done right you'll never see these addresses or they are represented by asterisk's in traceroutes.

By the looks of the trace I think your ISP is running a transparent proxy at hop 6, but instead of just rerouting traffic destined for port 80 they reroute all traffic to the proxy - resulting in problems that reach beyond a Thai engineer's comprehension capabilities.

Try the link above and check if the IP address returned by the webserver is the same address as assigned to your connection. If you can, do some traceroutes on different portnumbers and check if those paths go straight from hop 3 to hop 8.

Anyway, your ISP has certainly done is bad job in their network. Calling their support desk is useless, the ones sitting their do not know anything more than asking which lights on your modem are on..... If you manage to get through to 2nd or 3rd-line support, you will need a Thai to explain what the problem is.

[engrin]

Seems TOT is blocking utorrent

Can connect to seeders, sometimes 20 at a time but hardly anything comes down the pipe

Several times it has stopped downloading at all and my internet still works

[BFD]

Having a similar problem with ABC Torrent. I was getting a healthy speed a few days ago, but now I can't get over 3k/s. Mai dii!

BFD!

[gharknes]

I think this is all related, perhaps there is a problem at CAT, although it seems to effect P2P data only, mine is working today 100k

[TAWP]

There might be a first wave of torrent-bans since I'm getting problems connecting to _some_ trackers, but sometimes, after reconnecting the adsl (power-off-reboot) and I end up on a very different IP-range, I get through. This has worked for the last week, but today even that seem to stop working, i.e. the ranges I have managed to get through on before have stopped working too.

So...there might be a 'temporare glitch', but it's odd I can still get full speed and full tracker-connectivity against _some_ trackers (smaller and unknown to them perhaps) if it was protocol-related.

[gharknes]

well it has gone down to 10k again, I keep emailing Icare and every thime they call me it is ok then a couple hours laater it goes down, it is ruining my online gameing connection too, speed test shows full bandwidth, they are really messing around with torrent and voip users, here is my latest trace route, seems they are doing their best to stop me from investigating, I now jump straight to yahoo, they are hiding stuff.

NeoTrace Version 3.2 Trace Results

Target: www.yahoo.com

Date: Fri Aug 03 16:13:50 2007

Nodes: 6

Node Data

Node Net Reg IP Address Location Node Name

1 - - 192.168.1.2 12.933N, 100.883E me

2 1 - 192.168.1.1 Unknown

3 2 - 58.147.0.20 Unknown

4 3 - 10.122.20.254 Unknown

5 1 - 192.168.10.13 Unknown

6 4 1 209.131.36.158 San Jose f1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com

Packet Data

Node High Low Avg Tot Lost

1 0 0 0 1 0

2 2 2 2 3 0

3 18 11 13 3 0

4 85 85 42 5 3

5 13 13 13 4 3

6 364 324 344 2 0

[gharknes]

....

my ip shows as 117.47.2#.### which is quite normal registered in CA USA

...

If you use a normal webpage (port 80), the IP address shown will very likely be the proxy servers IP address.

Try this url: http://checkip.dyndns.org:8245

....

1 - - 192.168.1.2 12.933N, 100.883E me

2 1 - 192.168.1.1 Unknown my router

3 2 - 58.147.0.20 Unknown gateway

4 3 - 10.122.20.254 Unknown problem trace

5 1 - 192.168.10.13 Unknown problem trace

6 - - 0.0.0.0 Unknown No Response

7 2 - 58.147.0.51 Unknown

8 2 - 58.147.0.46 Unknown

9 4 - 202.47.254.161 Unknown

10 4 - 202.47.253.150 Unknown

11 4 - 202.47.253.217 Unknown

12 5 1 209.58.53.13 Los Angeles if-0-3.icore1.laa-losangeles.teleglobe.net

13 6 1 216.6.85.21 Los Angeles if-6-0-0-10.mcore4.laa-losangeles.teleglobe.net

14 6 1 216.6.86.9 Sunnyvale if-5-0.mcore4.pdi-paloalto.teleglobe.net

15 6 1 216.6.86.2 Sunnyvale if-7-0.core3.pdi-paloalto.teleglobe.net

16 7 1 207.45.196.90 Sunnyvale ix-5-0.core3.pdi-paloalto.teleglobe.net

17 8 2 216.115.107.51 Unknown g-0-0-0-p141.msr1.sp1.yahoo.com

18 9 2 209.131.32.17 Unknown te-8-1.bas-a1.sp1.yahoo.com

19 9 2 209.131.36.158 San Jose f1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com

Now this is gonna be a wild guess, but it looks like the packets take an extra path between hops 3 en 7. Not only the 192.168.n.n network is private, but the 10.n.n.n network is well and that one is used in hop 4.

All ISPs use the private address range in their networks, but if done right you'll never see these addresses or they are represented by asterisk's in traceroutes.

By the looks of the trace I think your ISP is running a transparent proxy at hop 6, but instead of just rerouting traffic destined for port 80 they reroute all traffic to the proxy - resulting in problems that reach beyond a Thai engineer's comprehension capabilities.

Try the link above and check if the IP address returned by the webserver is the same address as assigned to your connection. If you can, do some traceroutes on different portnumbers and check if those paths go straight from hop 3 to hop 8.

Anyway, your ISP has certainly done is bad job in their network. Calling their support desk is useless, the ones sitting their do not know anything more than asking which lights on your modem are on..... If you manage to get through to 2nd or 3rd-line support, you will need a Thai to explain what the problem is.

My ip shows the same so I'm sure if a proxy is involved, they are certaintly doing their best to stop some of my traffic.

nodes 4 and 5 above show 90% packet loss when the problem exists, it drops to about 50% when the problem goes away, so they are fltering through something in their network to stop certain types of data

Edited August 3, 2007 by gharknes

[Naam]

it is ruining my online gameing connection too

terrible! what a about buying a sandbox and play in it?

[Thailand Tiger]

I'm on Maxnet 1024/512 and have been having a lot of grief with it. After wasting hours trying to trace the problem and get advice on IRC, I've stumbled upon several posts on different sites (including this one obviously) that all point to the same thing. ISP incompetence or interference. If someone actually gets some straight answers, please post them here for everyones benefit.

There must be some way around this. Using ports normally reserved for other applications (that the ISPs don't want to block) would seem a start (though I suspect that port 80 wouldn't be a goer as the ISPs don't want people running webservers on thier home accounts)...any ideas anyone? I'm using encryption, but it doesn't seem to make any difference.

[Prasert]

I'm on Maxnet 1024/512 and have been having a lot of grief with it. After wasting hours trying to trace the problem and get advice on IRC, I've stumbled upon several posts on different sites (including this one obviously) that all point to the same thing. ISP incompetence or interference. If someone actually gets some straight answers, please post them here for everyones benefit.

There must be some way around this. Using ports normally reserved for other applications (that the ISPs don't want to block) would seem a start (though I suspect that port 80 wouldn't be a goer as the ISPs don't want people running webservers on thier home accounts)...any ideas anyone? I'm using encryption, but it doesn't seem to make any difference.

Blocking ports would be very difficult for the ISPs. In a normal situation, an application on your computer connects to a server on a well-known portnumber (e.g. 80 for http, 443 for https, 1863 for msn). The portnumber on your computer (where the connection comes from) will be higher than 1023 (high-port).

Peer2peer applications connect from high-port to high-port and this traffic can be manipulated by any ISP.

But.... not only P2P shows this behaviour, passive FTP connections and Skype behave the same. So if Skype is bad and FTP is painfully slow while webdownloads are fast, then it's likely that your ISP is using this way-too-simple filtering method.

A better step would be to look into the packets of this traffic (which can be done by a decent firewall or router) and traffic-shape the P2P packets while leaving Skype and FTP untouched. Bittorrent clients that are able to encrypt their traffic can bypass this measure as well (as the contents of the package will probably not be recognized).

Taking measures like these is basically fighting against the whole internet community: the ISP will never win it, since there are more users out there that will find ways around their filters.

On the other hand, offering good service and quality (and I mean the technical aspect!) becomes more and more difficult this way.

My idea is to approach this situation from the other side; my network recognizes 'normal traffic' and redirects that traffic over a seperate internet connection. All not-recognized traffic is sent out over the primary internet connection. Result: the majority that's browsing the web, using MSN and Skype, receiving and sending email, they experience a fast connection. The ones that are downloading by P2P or are using any other unknown bandwidth-consuming program are all sharing a different connection. If it's slow, they just have to wait longer (and I never heard someone complaining that it took so long to download porn).

From what I've seen over the last months, P2P traffic is cut-back on the international links between 8am and 8pm on working days. To my opinion a very good measure.

Some people tried to use the trick mentioned by Thailand Tiger above: using ports normally reserved for other applications, for example port 25 which is used by mail. This trick is so easy to block: the packet sent by the P2P application on this port number does not comply with the traffic characteristics for mail and is thus blocked.

The situation that Gharkness sees is probably his ISP experimenting with a transparent proxy. Normally, all traffic destined for port 80 is redirected to a proxy server. As you cannot influence this redirect it's called a transparent proxy. The proxy reads the url from the packet and checks it against a list of blocked websites. (This is done in Thailand by most ISPs and CAT)

But this only works for normal webtraffic. Secured webtraffic (SSL port 443) contains no readable url in the packet and cannot be inspected by a transparent proxy. This ISP seems to be redirecting not only traffic for port 80 but the rest as well, causing more problems than they can handle. And they certainly will not admit that to their customers.

[JimsKnight]

I couldn't even get torrent when I was in Thailand! It was one of those 'Blocked areas'

[tominbkk]

I don't know, I use P2P quite a bit, and over the last few days it has been just fine. I'm on True, one of the users who has had almost 100% uptime with the service for the past three years. My torrents lately have been very very healthy.

[Thailand Tiger]

I'm on Maxnet 1024/512 and have been having a lot of grief with it. After wasting hours trying to trace the problem and get advice on IRC, I've stumbled upon several posts on different sites (including this one obviously) that all point to the same thing. ISP incompetence or interference. If someone actually gets some straight answers, please post them here for everyones benefit.

There must be some way around this. Using ports normally reserved for other applications (that the ISPs don't want to block) would seem a start (though I suspect that port 80 wouldn't be a goer as the ISPs don't want people running webservers on thier home accounts)...any ideas anyone? I'm using encryption, but it doesn't seem to make any difference.

Blocking ports would be very difficult for the ISPs. In a normal situation, an application on your computer connects to a server on a well-known portnumber (e.g. 80 for http, 443 for https, 1863 for msn). The portnumber on your computer (where the connection comes from) will be higher than 1023 (high-port).

Peer2peer applications connect from high-port to high-port and this traffic can be manipulated by any ISP.

But.... not only P2P shows this behaviour, passive FTP connections and Skype behave the same. So if Skype is bad and FTP is painfully slow while webdownloads are fast, then it's likely that your ISP is using this way-too-simple filtering method.

A better step would be to look into the packets of this traffic (which can be done by a decent firewall or router) and traffic-shape the P2P packets while leaving Skype and FTP untouched. Bittorrent clients that are able to encrypt their traffic can bypass this measure as well (as the contents of the package will probably not be recognized).

Taking measures like these is basically fighting against the whole internet community: the ISP will never win it, since there are more users out there that will find ways around their filters.

From what I've seen over the last months, P2P traffic is cut-back on the international links between 8am and 8pm on working days. To my opinion a very good measure.

Some people tried to use the trick mentioned by Thailand Tiger above: using ports normally reserved for other applications, for example port 25 which is used by mail. This trick is so easy to block: the packet sent by the P2P application on this port number does not comply with the traffic characteristics for mail and is thus blocked.

Any ideas on the best way to reduce the impact of this? I have RC4 encrytion enabled, but it doesn't seem to make any difference. Maybe we'll all have to start emailing torrent pieces to each other...!

[steves_the_1]

same here on true 24/7 and if anything i would say its been getting better faster speeds and all

plus ive been downloading GB's like a madman lately

[LostInBKK]

Hmm, nice to see a local torrent community....I wasn't sure how popular it was in Thailand.

I've downloaded about 40gb in the last week or so....the apartment I live in has a 2/512 shared wireless connection.... soon I'll be back in the states at my roadrunner connection running at 15mb... .I can't wait!!

[TAWP]

Is anyone else ever getting any problems reaching http://tracker20.p2pcache.org/it/ ? (Nothing illegal about that url or anything at it. Before the censor-ship strikes again.)