100M : Problem downloading torrents?

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by Skie

I've just tried downloading a Linux iso from here (dont worry mods, its a Linux tracker and nothing else) and even with just 10 seeds I was hitting 3.4 MB/sec after a few minutes.

So either uTorrent manages to avoid VM's throttling or they just arent doing it in this area.

Probably area dependent, I found out last week p2p isnt shaped here at peak which shocked me given the utilisation issues.

Whenever I have tested torrents on a windows machine on a DC line generally it has no issues getting sustained max speeds on 100mbit ports on well seeded torrents. Most torrents generally have high speed seeders anyway so can go faster than you realise.

I was tempted to test on some gigabit servers, but they all in use for important stuff so I couldnt.

[roughbeast]

I just wouldn't expect anything marvellous from torrents anyway. The best I ever had for one torrent was 4.5MB. An aggregate speed from 6 good torrents gave me 10MB, just once. Most of the time I don't expect better than 0.5MB from any one torrent. Poorly seeded torrents can be way below this.

In any case I think it is pointless and anti-social to use torrents heavily during peak periods. I only run mine at night. For my own security I use BTGuard, which slows torrents down still further, but adds to my peace of mind.

To me the whole point of having 100Mb/120Mb is the use of capacity for multiple apparatus and persons across a large house. Fast torrenting is way down my list especially when all but the largest files download whilst I sleep.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by roughbeast

I just wouldn't expect anything marvellous from torrents anyway. The best I ever had for one torrent was 4.5MB. An aggregate speed from 6 good torrents gave me 10MB, just once. Most of the time I don't expect better than 0.5MB from any one torrent. Poorly seeded torrents can be way below this.

In any case I think it is pointless and anti-social to use torrents heavily during peak periods. I only run mine at night. For my own security I use BTGuard, which slows torrents down still further, but adds to my peace of mind.

To me the whole point of having 100Mb/120Mb is the use of capacity for multiple apparatus and persons across a large house. Fast torrenting is way down my list especially when all but the largest files download whilst I sleep.

I have to agree, I hope the new p2p shaping is better implemented in the next version of there traffic management than it is now. I have no issues outside of the main hours let them download and upload to there hearts content. But at peak times is just no on.

[qasdfdsaq]

So if one person watches a video through Youtube at peak time at 40Mbps and someone else watches it through torrents and uses 40Mbps at peak time why is the former somehow more entitled to use the same amount capacity which he is paying the same amount for?

[Dash: CF noob]

Here Here Qas.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Dash: CF noob

Here Here Qas.

My issue is about UPLOAD not download, Heavy torrent users will upload massive amounts to comply with seeding demands by most private trackers.

[roughbeast]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

So if one person watches a video through Youtube at peak time at 40Mbps and someone else watches it through torrents and uses 40Mbps at peak time why is the former somehow more entitled to use the same amount capacity which he is paying the same amount for?

You are missing the point. The way you put it sounds so reasonable except that is not the reality.

Videos need to be streamed in real time, i.e. You are watching it there and then. Torrent downloads / uploads can be deferred to off-peak times. Given that, even on BT fibre, there are congestion issues, it seems only sensible and mindful of other users to defer what you can.

Torrents are targeted by VM because they can and often are left for very long periods of time, 24/7, using disproportionate amounts of capacity up and down. Videos tend to last for shorter periods of time, mostly using the downstream.

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by roughbeast

Videos need to be streamed in real time, i.e. You are watching it there and then. Torrent downloads / uploads can be deferred to off-peak times.

Well, no. Your streaming can be deferred to off-peak times as well. Buffer it up off-peak and watch it the next day. iPlayer allows you to download many shows as well. Why should the guy using torrents wait an extra day to watch their stuff instead of you?

Given that, even on BT fibre, there are congestion issues, it seems only sensible and mindful of other users to defer what you can.

So people streaming Youtube should defer it too. You really need to watch that many cat videos today?

Personally I've never seen any congestion issues on BT fibre, especially not on the upstream, thanks to everyone getting 30Mbps of dedicated upstream capacity all the way up to the symmetric backhauls.



---------- Post added at 19:01 ---------- Previous post was at 18:59 ----------

Originally Posted by Sirius

My issue is about UPLOAD not download, Heavy torrent users will upload massive amounts to comply with seeding demands by most private trackers.

And the dimwits uploading several gigabytes of full-res photos to Facebook every day are more entitled why?

Sure, cable has a particular problem with upstream capacity, but that's why there's STM. It's implemented badly but the principle is right. Use a disproportionate amount, your speed gets cut, it cares neither what you use it for or why. Everyone is treated equally.

[Jumping]

"all downloads are equal, but some are more equal than others"