Tot Blocking All Torrent Traffic

[sillyman99]

why you feel the need to challange this i am not sure, but then i also wonder why he is so defensive.

Because this is the nature of Forums, I'm sure it's not only this one.

Was I defensive, I thought I was on the offensive.

Anyway, I downloaded the movie Frozen in 43 minutes and 46 Seconds on my TOT 4MB internet, there where of course lots of seeds and I hit speeds of 480 KB/s at times, average download speed worked out at 276 KB/s.

Before I changed my settings it had dropped to 30KB/s at best.

[JetsetBkk]

Mate, please understand, in the above post you quite clearly say you're on a 3Mb connection. Given the download speeds you were telling everybody you were getting, they were

Now you've said it's a 4Mb you made those speeds you're getting much more believable. You don't need photographic evidence, just to get your speed right from the get-go. Would have saved loads of problems!

Yes it was a mistake that I couldn't edit here as the edit facility on this forum doesn't last for long once posted.

But if 350 seemed unbelievable for a 3MB, is 450 - 480 equally unbelievable for a 4MB ?

Short answer: Yes. Are you sure you haven't been bumped up to 5 or 6 mbps?

480 KB/s on a 4Mbps link is 98% capacity. So it is unlikely to be real.

You must also realise that your bit torrent client's display of the download rate is not accurate. A lot depends on how the samples are taken, how often and whether smoothing is applied in the calculations to produce the displayed figure.

You cannot break the laws of physics, but you can fiddle the results.

Try running "Netmeter v1.1.4 beta": http://www.metal-machine.de/readerror/

- you get a much clearer picture of what is going up and down:

[JetsetBkk]

Yes I'm on TOT, 3MB service, 590 per month.

The point of my post was to maybe help some people who, like me, were suffering from TOT throttling.

I'm downloading right now at 350Kb/s.

Well its honestly not much of a help when you don't tell us what you're doing? For example, download client? Links source? File sharing service provider?

I reviewed the TV ToS/rules and there are no rules about discussing file sharing, just against posting "...links to pages that contain objectionable material.", which includes file sharing.

How do you know you are downloading at 350 Kilo-BYTES per second? That is more the full capacity of your line, when you account for packet overhead.

Lastly, what prevents TOT or any broadband service provider, from "throttling" file sharing downloads? (A quick search revealed this is being done in many countries.)

350 KBytes/s download from a 3 MB (3 Mbit/s) service = (350*1024*8)/(3*10^6)*100% bandwidth used = 95.5%. Unreal.

Of course, the 3 MB service may be 3*2^20 rather than 3*10^6 in which case he's only getting... (350*1024*8)/(3*2^20)*100% bandwidth used = 91.1%.

Bearing in mind that the download packets need acknowledging by the bit torrent client and typically take about 3% of the bandwidth of the downloads, that means he's getting either 98.4% or 93.9% bandwidth used.

why you feel the need to challange this i am not sure, but then i also wonder why he is so defensive.

Anyways i pay for a true 4mb package, with free upgrade to 5 and i actually get 7. anything is possible.

I always feel the need to challenge what is clearly wrong. I wish more people would. This forum is about helping people with their computers, Internet, etc. This is no place for exaggeration or BS. If someone has made a mistake, either deliberately or accidentally, I will call them on it.

This isn't a Church gathering.

re. Your 4mb and getting 7, you may have been upgraded. I was on an 8m/1m package and couldn't understand why my bill was showing 1100 baht and not 1500 baht. It had been reduced as they were restructuring their charges.

My neighbour is getting 4.7Mb although he says he is paying for 3. He probably got upgraded.

[JetsetBkk]

why you feel the need to challange this i am not sure, but then i also wonder why he is so defensive.

Because this is the nature of Forums, I'm sure it's not only this one.

Was I defensive, I thought I was on the offensive.

Anyway, I downloaded the movie Frozen in 43 minutes and 46 Seconds on my TOT 4MB internet, there where of course lots of seeds and I hit speeds of 480 KB/s at times, average download speed worked out at 276 KB/s.

Before I changed my settings it had dropped to 30KB/s at best.

Thanks - that's good solid information and fits nicely with your 4mb link.

I think the setting that you changed that made the big difference was the encryption. A friend of mine was complaining for months after he joined "TheBox" that he couldn't get a decent download rate, so I asked if he had turned on encryption. His reply "What's that?" said it all. After I turned it on (uTorrent client) he was getting excellent speeds.

But the original subject of this thread implies that TOT - and others - are now managing to "shape", i.e. throttle, even the encrypted p2p data. Whether it is "deep packet inspection" as someone suggested or "assume anything using high bandwidth is a torrent and throttle it" as someone else suggested, I don't know.

They may just have a list of IP's of the torrent trackers and block or throttle them. They can't throttle the source of the data files because that source is everybody else on the Internet. But they can throttle you if they think all you are doing is downloading torrents.

[lomatopo]

But the original subject of this thread implies that TOT - and others - are now managing to "shape", i.e. throttle, even the encrypted p2p data. Whether it is "deep packet inspection" as someone suggested or "assume anything using high bandwidth is a torrent and throttle it" as someone else suggested, I don't know.

As mentioned earlier in this thread, and in the related TRUE throttling thread, it does look like TOT may be using the Sandvine Policy Traffic Switch, and perhaps have not fully deployed this solution, hence some users seem to be unaffected. It seems like TOT started playing around with this back when this thread first began; perhaps they were unfamiliar with the different policies they can implement and they did block private tracker communications?

Random snippets....

The Sandvine application uses a different approach to disrupt BitTorrent traffic that makes seeding impossible. The Sandvine application intercepts peer-to-tracker communication to identify peers based on the IP address and port numbers in the peer list returned from the tracker. When Sandvine later sees connections to peers in the intercepted peer lists, it may (according to policy) break these connections by sending counterfeit TCP resets.

In filings with the FCC this summer, Comcast explicitly stated that it does not block access to video or P2P services.16 But as reported by Reuters, Comcast is using a type of network management service provided by a company called Sandvine to block BitTorrent uploading by its customers. Sandvine’s network management technique uses “deep-packet inspection” to limit the actions of Comcast customers. It contains a “redirecting agent” that monitors traffic and limits the number of P2P connection made to external users. Known as “session management,” it controls how many (if any) uploads this network operator’s users are allowed to have. According to Sandvine, “session management allows service providers to save anywhere from 0 percent up to 100 percent of all upstream traffic”. The method for doing this is by sending an exact replica of the requested packet back to both parties that includes areset command (RST), which then drops the connection. In doing so, Comcast masquerades as one of the end users to send the false reset command. By cutting off uploads with other users, the session management tool also cuts off all potential connections with that user, including downloads. This service essentially tells a Comcast customer that they are not allowed to distribute any information and limits the speed at which they can gain access to information from others.

Its interesting that when Sandvine announces customer wins they rarely ever reveal the names of the customers.

Sandvine Wins Nine New Service Provider Customers

Four new wins in North America, including a top-ten cable operator in the United States

Waterloo, Canada; June 3, 2010 – Sandvine, (TSX:SVC; AIM:SAND) a leading provider of intelligent network policy control solutions for fixed and mobile operators, today announced that it has won nine new service provider customers.

Six of the customers are fixed line service providers and three are mobile network operators. Four of Sandvine’s new service provider customers are based in North America, including one of the top ten cable operators in the United States and a North American tier-one DSL service provider with more than one million broadband subscribers. Three of the new customers come from the Europe Middle East and Africa (EMEA) sales region, and one each from Caribbean and Latin America and Asia Pacific.

“Sandvine established itself as a leader in network policy control after broad adoption of our solutions by North American service providers, particularly in the cable market. While we have diversified the business substantially since, the leading customers in our traditional market continue to see tremendous value from our growing roster of policy solutions,” said Tom Donnelly, Sandvine’s executive vice president of marketing and sales.

Two of Sandvine’s new customers were won through strategic reseller partnerships with some of the world’s largest network equipment manufacturers.

Sandvine’s solutions help its customers gain much-needed visibility into the data traffic traversing their networks, manage the growing demands of network traffic, and plan and execute the delivery of new service offerings to attract and retain subscribers and create sustainable business models.

Edited September 14, 2010 by lomatopo

[CDNinKS]

I think the setting that you changed that made the big difference was the encryption.

Thanks for that tip

Mine is working now again...

[sillyman99]

Thanks - that's good solid information and fits nicely with your 4mb link.

I think the setting that you changed that made the big difference was the encryption.

Yes, it was crap before, so I just ticked one box in my settings in BitComet and went from 30 to 300 KB/s.

To be honest I wasn't gonna say anything, but so many here were having problems, just thought I'd add my fix, anyway, it worked for me.

I made a terrible mistake of saying I had a 3MB service instead of my actual 4MB service and when I realized, I couldn't edit my post, and I'll probably never get over it.

Maybe tomorrow it will go back down again.

[PaulDoughfile]

I have a 4MB package with TOT.

I used to get speeds of around 300k but now I only get about 50k.

I have tried uTorrent, Deluge & BitTorrent all with forced encryption turned on.

The Deluge worked for a while at full speed and then went back to 50k downloads.

I know it's not my system because the speed sometimes jumps up to 300k in the wee hours of a morning but only for a couple of hours.

Anyone got any more suggestions ?

[siamect]

I have a 4MB package with TOT.

I used to get speeds of around 300k but now I only get about 50k.

I have tried uTorrent, Deluge & BitTorrent all with forced encryption turned on.

The Deluge worked for a while at full speed and then went back to 50k downloads.

I know it's not my system because the speed sometimes jumps up to 300k in the wee hours of a morning but only for a couple of hours.

Anyone got any more suggestions ?

And your ports in the router? Do you get slow speed on http and ftp downloads too?

Edited September 14, 2010 by siamect

[PaulDoughfile]

I assign my own port number and the "green light" comes on so it is forwarded and working.

Everything else is working at normal speeds

[JetsetBkk]

<snip>

When Sandvine later sees connections to peers in the intercepted peer lists, it may (according to policy) break these connections by sending counterfeit TCP resets.

<snip>

Sneaky bast bar stewards. Looks like someone needs to produce a TCP patch that ignores TCP Reset commands.

"Enabling Better Broadband with Network Policy Control" Maybe we should send the boys round and burn the tell them we're not happy with their product.

I've just found that other thread - it's quite old, isn't it. I'll go have a read after I've finished here.

[JetsetBkk]

I think the setting that you changed that made the big difference was the encryption.

Thanks for that tip

Mine is working now again...

Glad to hear it. But also thank sillyman99 for mentioning it first.

[JetsetBkk]

Thanks - that's good solid information and fits nicely with your 4mb link.

I think the setting that you changed that made the big difference was the encryption.

Yes, it was crap before, so I just ticked one box in my settings in BitComet and went from 30 to 300 KB/s.

<snip>

Similar to what happened with my friend. I guess I started using encryption after reading the Azureus "Wiki" on how to get good speeds.

Now it's just after 2:00am and I'm getting 450 - 550 kB/s down from just 2 torrents - a 55 GB Clint Eastwood movie pack and a 74 GB Stargate SG-1 All Seasons pack.

Gonna need a bigger hard drive...

[JetsetBkk]

<snip>

I know it's not my system because the speed sometimes jumps up to 300k in the wee hours of a morning but only for a couple of hours.

Anyone got any more suggestions ?[/font]

That's what I'm getting too - crap during the day and "blast off!" during the night. My poor old lap top hardly ever gets turned off now!

[tropo]

I had a guy from TOT call centre confirm they were throttling torrents because "it is not fair to other customers". He also agreed that TOT did not have enough bandwidth.

Download hogs should pay and it isn't fair on other users BUT despite all their attempts at throttling the hogs I'm still not getting decent speeds recently.

[nocturn]

I had a guy from TOT call centre confirm they were throttling torrents because "it is not fair to other customers". He also agreed that TOT did not have enough bandwidth.

Download hogs should pay and it isn't fair on other users BUT despite all their attempts at throttling the hogs I'm still not getting decent speeds recently.

funny, and here is me labouring under the misconception that computer networks like the internet were used to share data between computers.

last i checked i WAS paying.

[tropo]

I had a guy from TOT call centre confirm they were throttling torrents because "it is not fair to other customers". He also agreed that TOT did not have enough bandwidth.

Download hogs should pay and it isn't fair on other users BUT despite all their attempts at throttling the hogs I'm still not getting decent speeds recently.

funny, and here is me labouring under the misconception that computer networks like the internet were used to share data between computers.

last i checked i WAS paying.

Yeah, you are paying--- peanuts.

[Changian]

Downloading as I type 230+KB/s on TOT 6MB uTorrent with Forced Encryption

[lomatopo]

Downloading as I type 230+KB/s on TOT 6MB uTorrent with Forced Encryption

When I use TOT (4 Mega-bits per second downstream, 512 Kilo-bits per second upstream) and uTorrent 2.04 with "Forced" (have tried "Enabled"as well) encryption I have a lot of Public tracker issues, both UDP and HTTP. A strange set of error messages: "Failure: Requested download is not authorized for use with this tracker", "offline (timed out)", "No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it", "Connection timed out". And I'm lucky to get 2.5 Kilo-BYTES per second downloading with a hugely seeded torrent.

With this same torrent on TRUE, CSLoxInfo or a seedbox I do not see the same error messages. For me its not a huge issue as I have other choices. Note that my FTP speeds on TOT are fine.

[JetsetBkk]

Downloading as I type 230+KB/s on TOT 6MB uTorrent with Forced Encryption

When I use TOT (4 Mega-bits per second downstream, 512 Kilo-bits per second upstream) and uTorrent 2.04 with "Forced" (have tried "Enabled"as well) encryption I have a lot of Public tracker issues, both UDP and HTTP. A strange set of error messages: "Failure: Requested download is not authorized for use with this tracker", "offline (timed out)", "No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it", "Connection timed out". And I'm lucky to get 2.5 Kilo-BYTES per second downloading with a hugely seeded torrent.

With this same torrent on TRUE, CSLoxInfo or a seedbox I do not see the same error messages. For me its not a huge issue as I have other choices. Note that my FTP speeds on TOT are fine.

Worrying. Are TOT interfering with your transmissions or maybe the "forced encryption" is not recognised by the trackers.

[nocturn]

Downloading as I type 230+KB/s on TOT 6MB uTorrent with Forced Encryption

This is certainly not a moral question, but one rooted in common sense -- why ever would you post a photo in this topic proving you are actively engaged in downloading pirated music?

You are certainly not doing your fellow tormenters any service, but the moral majority will certainly appreciate the fuel you provide their indignation.

[Vertical]

Downloading as I type 230+KB/s on TOT 6MB uTorrent with Forced Encryption

This is certainly not a moral question, but one rooted in common sense -- why ever would you post a photo in this topic proving you are actively engaged in downloading pirated music?

You are certainly not doing your fellow tormenters any service, but the moral majority will certainly appreciate the fuel you provide their indignation.

Moral considerations about pirated software/music download in Thailand is ridiculous where you can buy any software/music in any department store.

Not happy with ToT? Make a new contract with another ISP like TRUEMOVE which has served me well for years

without fux0ring up my internet like ToT. ToT is the worst ISP in Thailand. They not invest in infrastructure.

Using crap and complaining about crap is like

buying milk and complaining its milk.

[beano2274]

Downloading from TOT very well, only on 2MB service but good speeds of over 100kbs.

Suggest people look if using Malwarebytes, as this program blocks links to trackers and also to websites such as 1337x.org.

BTW - In Nonthaburi.

I had the engineers here the other day, checking my line(due to someone crossing wires, or trying to use my Internet, from the Condo office), they knew nothing of torrents being throttled, and they were impressed by my DVD collection (all downloads).

Protocol Encyrption is Disabled and allowing legacy connections.

Edited October 13, 2010 by beano2274

[Westerner]

Suggest people look if using Malwarebytes, as this program blocks links to trackers and also to websites such as 1337x.org.

I downloaded Malwarebytes a couple of days ago on the recommendation of a moderator of thebox.bz, now you've got me wondering whether I should remove it.

[Supernova]

Suggest people look if using Malwarebytes, as this program blocks links to trackers and also to websites such as 1337x.org.

I downloaded Malwarebytes a couple of days ago on the recommendation of a moderator of thebox.bz, now you've got me wondering whether I should remove it.

The problem only seems to occur while the Realtime Protection module is running -- a feature that's only available in the full or paid version of the program.

Unless this issue directly affects you, I wouldn't be too hasty to remove it.

Edited October 14, 2010 by Supernova