man00
join:2003-07-25
74986 | when did AT&T start playing around with torrent transfers Anytime I try to start a download I get dropped have to reset the modem...Does it in XP or Vista... | |
|
 
rey00
@swbell.net | Re: when did AT&T start playing around with torrent transfers what type of modem do you have? i have the 2wire gateway and i've been torrenting ever since i got dsl.. no problems at all. | |
|
Frohike
Premium
join:2000-07-23
Waxahachie, TX | They havent played around with torrent - never have. | |
|
man00
join:2003-07-25
74986 | old 5100B...tried another one had the same issues. | |
|
Unreliable
join:2008-12-13
2 edits | I'm having the same problems as OP (att - los angeles)
I was happily using my Dsl for around 9 months and just started using torrents about 2 weeks ago when my IP started renewing randomly / frequently / constantly.
Requires me to power down and up about every hour....
Now I can't even play online games without the disconnects.
I wish I would have never started using torrents cause I feel like I'm blacklisted or something.
| |
|
 | NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
 ·Pacific Bell - SBC
| Re: when did AT&T start playing around with torrent transfers I have the SpeedStream 4100 modem. When I used a Netgear FVS114 router, torrents were troublesome. Since replacing the Netgear with a D-Link DIR-655 router, I've had no troubles with torrents.
If using BitTorrent causes problem such as you describe, you can try cutting back the number of peer connections allowed. If you cut back to only 15 connections, and the problems cease, you have a local hardware issue.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|
man00
join:2003-07-25
74986 | I found if I make a internet connection within windows and not setup the modem with user name/pass..ect seems to help a lot | |
|
| Frodo
join:2006-05-05
Lees Summit, MO
| Re: when did AT&T start playing around with torrent transfers said by man00  :I found if I make a internet connection within windows and not setup the modem with user name/pass..ect seems to help a lot That would suggest that the NAT engine is overloaded with too many connections. That theory would be reinforced if there are many peers on the torrent. If your modem permits it, maybe placing the public IP address on the PC will take the NAT out of the picture. | |
|
| | man00
join:2003-07-25
74986 | Re: when did AT&T start playing around with torrent transfers placing the public IP address on the PC will take the NAT out of the picture.
huh? | |
|
| | | Frodo
join:2006-05-05
Lees Summit, MO
| Re: when did AT&T start playing around with torrent transfers If your PC is drawing a private IP address, such as the 192.168.1.64 that my 4100 hands out, then the connections coming in the modem needs to be converted from the external "public" ip address to the "private" ip address. A modem can only handle a finite amount of these connections. I have a $5 router that can't handle more than 50 connections. Anyway, my 4100 has the option of placing the public IP address on the computer. If that option is available on the 5100, then *maybe* the nat engine need not be used, since no IP address conversion is needed. Generally, the conversion is handled through a NAPT engine, that combines address translation and port translation. | |
|
| | | Frodo
join:2006-05-05
Lees Summit, MO
1 edit | 
Public IP address | | 
Private IP address | |
said by man00 :placing the public IP address on the PC will take the NAT out of the picture. huh? If your modem provides your PC with a private IP address, such as one that begins with 192.168, then a NAT table is used to keep track of your connections. That table is of finite size, and, generally, is smaller, the older your modem is. If your PC draws a public IP address, then there is no NAT concerns. My VOIP software indicates the two types of connections. If I overload the NAT table, my modem is going to give me all kinds of trouble, something that won't happen with a public IP address on the PC. A google of "5100b" "nat table" indicates that this issue has come up before.
When you said "I found if I make a internet connection within windows and not setup the modem with user name/pass..ect seems to help a lot", that's what made me suspect nat, because if you have PPPoE on the computer, you'll draw a public IP address on the computer. | |
|
| | | | man00
join:2003-07-25
74986 | Re: when did AT&T start playing around with torrent transfers So what are you saying I should do/change in the modem. router pc? | |
|
| | | | | NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| Re: when did AT&T start playing around with torrent transfers
Symmetric NAT connection. |
I am currently running uTorrent through a "symmetric NAT" connection, and have "Global maximum number of connections" at 200, and "Maximum number of peers connected per torrent" at 60. I normally only run one torrent at a time, so I could probably bump that second number higher; but this is where I leave it while I am running PPP on the modem.
I've had a Netgear number fold with half those maximums. I am currently using a D-Link DIR-655.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|
| | | | | Frodo
join:2006-05-05
Lees Summit, MO
| said by man00 :So what are you saying I should do/change in the modem. router pc? Well, if you have a router, the modem could be bridged, and the router could handle the PPPoE, and then everything would depend on the size of the router's NAT table. Without the specifications for the router, can't say. The only thing I can say is that if AT&T was blocking your P2P, then it would work no better when Windows handled the logon, versus when the modem handled the logon. | |
|
man00
join:2003-07-25
74986 | Nope there something up for sure make little or no difference with router or without..I bet the house AT&T is playing around with something. | |
|
| Frohike
Premium
join:2000-07-23
Waxahachie, TX
| Re: when did AT&T start playing around with torrent transfers said by man00 :Nope there something up for sure make little or no difference with router or without..I bet the house AT&T is playing around with something. Start looking for a new home then..... | |
|
| NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| said by man00 :Nope there something up for sure make little or no difference with router or without..I bet the house AT&T is playing around with something. Might as well sign the deed over to me; you will lose that bet.
I've been using BitTorrent for a couple of years, and only had troubles with local hardware.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|
man00
join:2003-07-25
74986 | Something has changed, started about two months ago. | |
|
| NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| Re: when did AT&T start playing around with torrent transfers Not that I can tell. Been using BT to grab fansubbed anime for a couple of years, now. The only problems I have ever encountered were local hardware. I went through two Netgear routers which couldn't handle the number of peers connecting in.
Currently running a D-Link DIR-655, and I believe my bottleneck is now the SS4100. I keep my Global maximum peer connections low (well under 1,000; more like ... 200).
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|
man00
join:2003-07-25
74986
| My point was if nothing changed hardware wise on my end and all the sudden the problem shows up most of the time its out of the hands of the common user. Thats saying all the hardware on my end working as always..I seen some folks saying the same that their ISP is doing some choking on torrents at this time. | |
|
| Frodo
join:2006-05-05
Lees Summit, MO
| Re: when did AT&T start playing around with torrent transfers said by man00 :My point was if nothing changed hardware wise on my end and all the sudden the problem shows up most of the time its out of the hands of the common user. Thats saying all the hardware on my end working as always..I seen some folks saying the same that their ISP is doing some choking on torrents at this time. But if that's true, then "I found if I make a internet connection within windows and not setup the modem with user name/pass..ect seems to help a lot" has to be a fluke, and false most of the time. If the isp is blocking the torrent, I don't see why it wouldn't also block the torrent when id/password is negotiated on the PC. That's the part that point to hardware, and the NAT table in particular, at least the way I see it. | |
|
| NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
1 edit | There is a long thread, in the Comcast forums, about the use of a Sandvine appliance (Sandvine is the name of the manufacturer). The poster who started that thread presented some pretty compelling evidence in support of his theory:
»Comcast is using Sandvine to manage P2P Connections
I believe the OP included a description of the tests that he ran to support his claim, but I am too lazy to look for the exact details.
OTOH, I have never seen anything that made me want to test his theory against the AT&T network. I've always been able to prove, to my satisfaction, that the problems were on my end, and to get past the issue. I've never felt the need to actually dig out the details, posted in that link, to try and prove that AT&T was up to anything. If you feel that they are, please feel free to read up on the method used to prove that Comcast was throttling by using their Sandvine appliance to send forged RST packets to both ends of a file transfer.
Earlier, today, I had a torrent rolling along at around 270 kB/s to 280 kB/s. (For me, getting a good speed is highly dependent on getting into a good swarm with many peers; I often wind up in a swarm with, maybe, six peers total, and only one seeding. Damned hard to expect high rate of download under those circumstances.)
Only a few complaints against AT&T, where people have suspected them of throttling; but never any conclusive evidence as shown over in the Comcast forum.
This "common user" had to go through two routers to find hardware up to the demands of P2P with a BitTorrent client.
If you really think AT&T is up to something, you need to take the steps to prove it.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|
man00
join:2003-07-25
74986
| I'm not trying to prove to anyone that they or are not..I just ask when did at&t start messing with torrents. I know for a fact for instance you download a ver of Linux which I have many times its almost always full speed 300k +..Now it will jump to 100k for split second then goes back down to 30-32 speed and stays.. | |
|
| Frodo
join:2006-05-05
Lees Summit, MO
| Re: when did AT&T start playing around with torrent transfers said by man00 :I'm not trying to prove to anyone that they or are not.. You have a theory. Since none of us can replicate the problem you are having, we have to go on what you're saying is happening. The biggest item undercutting your theory is that, when you put the logon/pass on the PC (which causes a public IP address onto the PC), the problem clears. When you use the modem for IP/password (which causes a private IP to be onto the PC and uses NAT), the problems appears. If you can clear the problem consistently by putting the ID/password on the PC, which means you negotiate the PPPoE logon on the PC, it is extremely unlikely that AT&T is the culprit here.
One other thing here is, have you restricted your upload to about 80% of your maximum upload speed. If your modem doesn't prioritize "ACK" packets, uploading at maximum speeds will slow download speeds considerably.
Other things would be to clean out the modem of dust so that it isn't overheating. | |
|
| 
rahlquist
Redeye
join:2001-10-30
Villa Rica, GA
| said by man00 :I'm not trying to prove to anyone that they or are not..I just ask when did at&t start messing with torrents. I know for a fact for instance you download a ver of Linux which I have many times its almost always full speed 300k +..Now it will jump to 100k for split second then goes back down to 30-32 speed and stays.. Sounds very familiar, take a look at »On and Off internet... and »www.pcsites.com/Clipboard-1a.jpg (which is from »The Endless Dropped Download problems ) and see if those traffic patterns sound like what you are seeing.
Really starting to wonder whats going on.....
--
Fed Up With Stupidity?
Patentlystupid.com | |
|
| NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| said by man00 :I'm not trying to prove to anyone that they or are not..I just ask when did at&t start messing with torrents. July 4, 1776. Yes, I am being facetious. I have no evidence that they ever "messed with torrent". I've been downloading with one, or another BitTorrent client since ... August, 2004, anyway. In four years I've seen really slow downloads (maybe a slow as 1 kB/s), and max downloads. I've seen blocked peer connections (Kerio Personal Firewall 1.1.5 has a severe bug; don't create more than 150, or so rules, or you will encounter it), and I've seen my router fall over for too many peer connections (Netgear FR114P and Netgear FVS114 both seem susceptible). I've yet to bridge my SS4100 modem (I get AT&T' "Walled Garden" for some kind of password "mismatch", though the password works fine when I return the modem to NAT mode).
I have not, ever, seen evidence of AT&T "messing with torrents".
I know for a fact for instance you download a ver of Linux which I have many times its almost always full speed 300k +..Now it will jump to 100k for split second then goes back down to 30-32 speed and stays..
You know for a fact how a torrent runs on your connection; but not on mine. I've seen a consistent 300 kB/s in the last couple of months. I find my download speeds tend to vary with the apparent interest in the shows I am grabbing. Fansubbed anime; not nearly as popular as the latest Hollywood junk the MPAA/RIAA is crying "Piracy!" over. Sometimes I get a real dog of a torrent, if the show is a pretty obscure offering.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|
Frohike
Premium
join:2000-07-23
Waxahachie, TX
| And I work for AT&T and I can tell you 100% they are not jacking with torrent downloads.
Like YOU stated above - you put pppoe on your PC and the problem went away. That points to the modem not being able to handle the numerous peer connections when it handles the authentication....
We are trying to help, but it seems your just ignoring us and just want people to be cattle and blindly agree with you. | |
|
man00
join:2003-07-25
74986 | Tried another router today LINKSYS Cisco Wireless-G Router WRT54G..Same thing levels off at max speed of 30-32. What about changing ports forwarding or what ever its called | |
|
| NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| Re: when did AT&T start playing around with torrent transfers
uTorrent configuration. |
I have 'at&t Yahoo! HSI Pro' (3008/512), and running a SpeedStream 4100 with PPPoE on the modem, private IP address to the router. D-Link DIR-655 with 192.168.1.64 on the WAN port, and the LAN DHCP address is 192.168.102.1. MAC address reservation of destination computer, port 18769 forwarded through the router. Screen shot shows the client configuration. Fastest download I've seen this week: 279 kBytes/second.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|
| | man00
join:2003-07-25
74986
1 edit | Re: when did AT&T start playing around with torrent transfers I'm using bit comet
I tried changing settings but ended up going back to AUTO | |
|
| | |
utorrent123
@swbell.net | Re: when did AT&T start playing around with torrent transfers get a better client 
bitcomet sucks bro
and torrent speeds always depend on the seeder's upstream! | |
|
|
man00
join:2003-07-25
74986
| Well I tried something I took my Laptop and router over to Ft Smith AR and used a friend internet connection. After some setup changes to be able for Cox to work I tried one of about 15 torrents. Not some but all downloaded a lot and I mean a lot faster over there. None went back anywhere near the 30-32 that I saw with at&t bad for me Cox isn't here in my town..But that again makes me think AT&T is up to something. Only thing I didn't use of course was the modem but I have setup to put everything on the router anyway. | |
|
| NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| Re: when did AT&T start playing around with torrent transfers Get yourself a copy of Wireshark, and watch the packets. Use the thread I linked; find where the poster described his technique to prove that Comcast was sending forged RST packet. If you can replicate his results, we'd like to see it.
Nobody has ever been able to demonstrate that AT&t is up to no good with torrents; and too many are not having trouble for it to be anything AT&T is deliberately doing on a widespread basis.
Doesn't rule out issues between your modem and aggregation router (which Wireshark would be useful in scoping out).
Or just follow your beliefs, and drop AT&T for another provider.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|
| 
Flippant
So Much For Subtlety
Premium,Mod
join:2000-06-04
Katy, TX | Hate to ask, but have you tweaked your DSL? If you are running an MTU of 1500 you could be causing yourself a good deal of slow down. That this is not being reported widely there is lots of doubt of throttling. | |
|
| | man00
join:2003-07-25
74986 | Re: when did AT&T start playing around with torrent transfers I haven't changed anything | |
|
BeefJerky9
join:2005-05-28
Houston, TX
1 edit | I'm going to have to chime in and say that my torrents are working great with AT&T as well. In fact, I'm testing an Ubuntu Linix distro download now and am getting a steady 625KB/sec. I'm using a speedstream 4100 modem and a Netgear WGU624 router with a laptop running Vista. | |
|
|
|
|
·