O Canada! > Canadian > Rogers > P2P and BT traffic shaping proof.

reply to pulp46

Re: P2P and BT traffic shaping proof.

reply to ted24
i never said outside source and i am stoping with that.

reply to ted24
When I'm home all the local ISP's use packateers except for one (and their consumer service is a joke) to deprioritize P2P apps.I though I was free in Canada to fileshare without boundry, but this topic seems to imply otherwise. Sbrook you are so right, they advertise speed speed but then hold back the ones who actually want to use it, grrrrr

LOL You left Jerry Springer Undressed for all to see? Wow, what kind of depravity has been covered up.... Heeehee....

na its just jerry is just a tv rip
Lets just say i havint been to the movies in a bit lol

reply to RioZen

reply to ted24
dude your using abc 2.6.9 its not the best version (its acutally quite shitty)

Goto the forums and get the latest beta, awesome improvements
--
www.djmau108.com

reply to pulp46

reply to ted24
This maybe nothing but... when i use a tcp based tracker its slow (30-80kb/s) with a good amount of seeds and peers(50+ and 100+) but when i used a UDP based tracker it maxes out speed wise (300kb/s) with less peers and seeds. My bt has been slow as of last week, it use to go very fast before that (200-300kb/s). sandvine only affects the tcp protocol?

Don't think it would matter since the tracker communication is separate from peer communication. Even if the tracker communication was watched, it probably wouldn't be worthwhile to do anything with the data other than notice that you talked to a tracker. TCP or UDP shouldn't matter.

In any event, I think tracker communication is shaped too.

reply to puzz1ed

reply to ted24
So I talked to a Tier 2 rep.

Before I did that though I've come to doubt the traffic shaping theory. I did further tests and it seems to show that my sb5100 has trouble if data is received at the exact moment that data is being sent. I found that Azureus (and perhaps other BT software) sets the TCP "PSH" flag on all its outgoing data packets. Not sure how this happens but it could be because Azureus uses "nonblocking" sockets. The effect is that data is sent immediately and the receiver is requested to ACK immediately for each TCP packet. The problem that seems to happen is that BT tries to send 16K of data in 1500 byte packets (11 packets) and the receiver tries to send a 66 bytes ACK packet back immediately for each one. The ACK is always coming back at the same time that data is being sent and the modem screws up. I've got Azureus logs and ethernet packet traces that seem to show this.

I used to have a big problem with uploading and downloading simultaneously. I reported it, Rogers did something, I thought it was fixed, but I think a problem is still there. Most people have the same 2.3.1.3 firmware as myself so I think it has to do with the hardware outside my house.

I think the reason that FTP uploading still works fine is because it doesn't set the TCP "PSH" flag on the packets. Packets get sent in batches and it seems that less ACK packets are sent back and in a much more orderly "ping pong" fashion.

SSH seems to set the PSH flag as well to maintain interactivity and I see problems there as well but not nearly as much because the packets are usually much smaller.

I think MSO_are_evil was right but we haven't heard much from him lately.
»www2.dslreports.com/forum/remark···start=22

Okay, so I talked to Rogers, and basically after a lot of anguish they say they will not support me because my problems are primarily with BT. They only support ftp to the Geocities site (just don't hit your transfer limit), transfers from their news servers (speed cap there), and web browsing. It'll be hard to demonstrate the problem with just those things.

I asked about new firmware but the rep said he didn't know of any and that they typically don't roll any out unless it's needed. Hopefully, the rumours of new firmware will come to pass sooner than later.
»www2.dslreports.com/forum/remark···ode=flat

At this point, I can only:

1) Hope that the Bell eXpertech trucks I've been seeing around the area mean that DSL is coming.
2) Hope that the newly released BT v4 becomes less anal and use more FTP-like transfers. (release notes mention marking packets as "bulk" similar to FTP so there's hope)
3) Start tweaking Azureus source code and try to make it less anxious.

reply to ted24
Bell is actually awesome for BT, if you primarily use BT, I'd suggest switching, only downfall is the lower speeds

But atleast you acheive those speeds faster or acheive them at all then certain people here on rogers

Im not puttin down Rogers, I love rogers as many know lol, but the recent cap got me bummed out

Well now im gone all Bell, cell, net, tv
--
www.djmau108.com

I loved Rogers too until this started happening last October and they started charging for some of the HD channels even if you were paying for the regular versions. Caps go without saying even though I could live with it.

I would have locked into the 15% off bundle if it weren't for the BT/service problems. Now I'm glad I didn't. I'm now cutting back my TV channels and now I'm totally open to other ISP solutions.

reply to ted24
You might want to peek at this new thread on the Shaw forum...»www2.dslreports.com/forum/remark···ode=flat
It appears that Shaw tech support is admitting to it, can Robbers be far behind?