could someone explain my *horrible* download rates ?

[flexy123]

ok, here some info first:

I am on a fiber connection advertized as 4000/384.....i am also behind a NAT router (my providers) and there is NO way to open/forward incoming ports. (Believe me, i tested thouroughly and i am familiar with port forwarding etc. when i still was on cable and had my good old wrt54g router :)

But i dont think this is the problem.

The problem is that according to bitcomet (see image) i am connected to hundreds of peers...but the big majority of these is not sending at all....i experimented with various settings in BC....like max connections per task (which i now have at 250) and "max connections to keep" which is now at 100. I already had those settings for testing purposes at 450/300 etc..

But.....i can have hundreds and hundreds of peers and they seem all to be connected...[and if they couldnt connect because of my NAT wouldn't it say "disconnectedX" in the BC status screen ??? ] - but out of all those hundreds of peers i get a TOTAL of say....11kB/sec to 30kB/s dl rate...the only time when i get good rates if ONE or two peers have a GOOD rate...

BC status screen crappy download

I have my net optimized with cablenut and do tests all the time...i have the SP2 half-open connection patch for TCP/IP...(limit is at 100 or so)...and otherwise everything tweaked to the max. ..i usually use 90% of my download cap and 85 of my up-cap etc...

any ideas what's going on ?

I am just starting to wonder..when i see a torrent and i know it has 1000 seeds....can't i expect better dl rates then maybe 30kB/s ??? (Great..right now that one at the top is dl at 5kB/sec....)

[Dark_Shroud]

Follow our settings guide to configure BC. Just don't try to patch the SP-2 limit, because you don't need to.

Anyway the link is in my sig. :)

[flexy123]

Follow our settings guide to configure BC. Just don't try to patch the SP-2 limit, because you don't need to.

Anyway the link is in my sig. :)

dark shroud,

could you tell me how i can check whether my NAT/firewall affects me ? If i had problems because of NAT...how can i verify this looking at the BC status screen ?

Also..the option "use listening mode only"....it's not explained what exactly it does if i would to check this.

I am not sure whether the UDP NAT traversal (the main reason i am using BC) actually works for me. (right now its on Auto)

regarding BC settings...well yeah i tried (and try) all those recommended ones....but my speeds are still way below average....otherwise i am using all recommended settings for my conection.

[Dark_Shroud]

Do not check "No Listening Mode." My understanding is that it will go into trackerless mode only. And this will slow you down big time.

If you want to see if you're actually online then while running BitComet go to Canyouseeme.org/ and enter the port number BitComet is using.

As for NAT, this you don't have to worry about. Do you actually own a Firewall NAT router? Because that Firewall will kill bittorrent traffic.

EDIT, Ok, I just reread yout post and saw your router. :rolleyes: Make sure you have up to date firmware with that brand of Linksys. You can look up a guide on how to port forward at Portforward.com.

You should also find out how fast you really are. Without any p2p or IM programs running to a speed test as DSL Reports.

[The UnUsual Suspect]

I will add that with a max upload provided by your ISP of 384kb/s, this limits your upload rate to a max of 48kB/s. Since you are spreading this among several torrents, you are providing very little upload to your peers.

Bit torrent protocall is designed to provide the most download to those who upload the most.

If my upload was limited as yours is, I would not attempt to run more then one torrent at a time, as doing so would slow down any user I was connected to.

To explain this as simple as possible, when you are connected to a peer, but not responding and sending the data they request, they in turn are not sending the data you request.

Also, if you do not have your port forwarded through your router, you can not expect to get really good download speeds.

My current ISP provides 8m down and 768k up. With this I never run more then two torrents at a time, and usually run only one. I generally get speeds of about 100-150kB/s, and on very healthy torrents get 400-600kB/s download.

I would recommend you try running just one very healthy torrent while limiting your upload to 30kB/s.

Most linux distributions have very healthy torrents, or I can provide you with one if you like.

If you were able to forward your port correctly, with your connection I would expect you could see average speeds 50-80kB/s and sometimes upto 200kB/s.

Suspect

[flexy123]

well....i HAD a wrt54G before i was with *that* ISP now....i am on a fiber network now and behind a router, THEIR (provider's) router - and i do not have any control over it ! (i dont even have my own router right now)

means: there is NO way to forward/open ports. So...i am relying if the BC UDP nat traversal works since i cant do *anything* regarding opening ports.

unusual_suspect:

() Yes..i throttled my upload speed down just to make sure i dont max out ! Otherwise my max is about 38 or so.

[The UnUsual Suspect]

a question concerning the router supplyed by your isp.

Do you have the option of them providing just the modem, and using your own router?

If not, I would think they would be willing to setup port forwarding for you.

If you didn't want to ask them because of it being for bit torrent usage, then simply state you are using bit torrent for completely legal purposes like linux distributions, open source products like open office, and fan produced films like star trek new voyages.

This is where most of my bandwidth goes to.

Suspect

[Dark_Shroud]

Don't forget that World of Warcraft also uses bittorrent and Waner Bros also sells stuff online with Bittorent. Bittorrent is legal even though not all of its content & users are.

[flexy123]

Don't forget that World of Warcraft also uses bittorrent and Waner Bros also sells stuff online with Bittorent. Bittorrent is legal even though not all of its content & users are.

well i dont have the option for my own router...its' just how their network is set up...*everyone* on this network is behind a NAT router/switch.

I have a LAN outlet right in my appt..so i dont use a modem as i did with cable. (Just plug network cable right in).

Also..i already wrote their support....but they were not realy helpful and replied back they dont block any ports on their router....but it's defintly the case that ANY unsolicated incoming port is blocked...so i have to rely on Nat traversal. (All the clients here are assigned a private IP while the "real" IP is the IP of their router.)

I researched A LOT already what i can do (lol)...but as it looks i cant do more than living with those speeds....eg. AVERAGE good speed for me is like 50kB/s for a torrent...then i can be glad already. There are times where i get good speeds...but BY FAR less than what i had with comcast (cable)..where i had my router and portforwarding set up....i had speeds 200,300, 400 etc.kB/s

[kluelos]

I am assuming quite a bit about this setup. Typically this would be internet service provided to the whole building, with few if any choices or options for the lessee. There's going to be a router of indeterminate make. It might be possible to probe the router to see what it is. The first thing I'd look at is the IP address you get assigned. The easiest way for them to do this is via DHCP, otherwise they'd have to fuss with all kinds of problems when tenants couldn't connect. That would make supporting the network a full-time job, and a completely frustrating one. If it's a standard subnet sort of address, then try connecting to the base address with your browser. You probably won't be able to log in, but all you're looking for is a log-in screen that ID's the router.

For now though, let's take them at their word. There is a router, but it is not firewalling anything. THe question is, are you being firewalled? I assume that you did set a listen port. In that case, the answer is "yes", because every one of your connections is initiated as "Local", the usual symptom of a blocked listen port.

The next question is, of course, who's blocking it? You want to make absolutely certain it isn't you. Double-check for firewalls running on your machine. Unless you have a very good handle on what's going on, don't assume one couldn't be running without you knowing about it.

Where all that will get you, I'm not sure. You may be in position to say, "Untrue, you are blocking most incoming ports!", for whatever that might be worth. Possibly they'll then agree to unblock it, probably not. You'll have the satisfaction of making them look like idiots, though. And you can maybe agitate for a rent reduction since they've crippled the internet service, then lied about it, &c, &c. Maybe that will get you somewhere.

[flexy123]

I am assuming quite a bit about this setup. Typically this would be internet service provided to the whole building, with few if any choices or options for the lessee. There's going to be a router of indeterminate make. It might be possible to probe the router to see what it is. The first thing I'd look at is the IP address you get assigned. The easiest way for them to do this is via DHCP, otherwise they'd have to fuss with all kinds of problems when tenants couldn't connect. That would make supporting the network a full-time job, and a completely frustrating one. If it's a standard subnet sort of address, then try connecting to the base address with your browser. You probably won't be able to log in, but all you're looking for is a log-in screen that ID's the router.

For now though, let's take them at their word. There is a router, but it is not firewalling anything. THe question is, are you being firewalled? I assume that you did set a listen port. In that case, the answer is "yes", because every one of your connections is initiated as "Local", the usual symptom of a blocked listen port.

The next question is, of course, who's blocking it? You want to make absolutely certain it isn't you. Double-check for firewalls running on your machine. Unless you have a very good handle on what's going on, don't assume one couldn't be running without you knowing about it.

Where all that will get you, I'm not sure. You may be in position to say, "Untrue, you are blocking most incoming ports!", for whatever that might be worth. Possibly they'll then agree to unblock it, probably not. You'll have the satisfaction of making them look like idiots, though. And you can maybe agitate for a rent reduction since they've crippled the internet service, then lied about it, &c, &c. Maybe that will get you somewhere.

hehe kluelos....i had "some" network discovery tools running..and YEAH i can connect to the router..and even read a lot of configuration strings.....i can read the ARP/routing table/interfaces...etc..etc... the big Q would be whether i actually can CHANGE the config...but needles to say it would be...uhm...considered as a serious attack :)

Its NOT as easy that i can login there with the browser...there is a SNMP interface (if you know what this is)...but you can also try to telnet to the router....but i didnt get as far as trying to login since an attempted login could be seen as attack. etc.. etc...

Well..anyway i dont have any software firewalls running, also dont have the XP firewall on.

Btw. the machine (the router, default gateway) is (as far as i understand) a fiber "last mile" endpoint....running vxworks...and each unit supplies 8 endpoints with all the services.

I am assuming that the router is the default gateway my DHCP set up.

But then i still dont know a lot about that network....the blocking could happen somewhere else...AFTER that default gatway.....hmm..which is actually interesting to look into...

Sorry being offtopic :)

[The UnUsual Suspect]

Ok,

My confusion has been cleared up (I think) :P

basically I think they are correct that they do not block any ports. In fact what you are asking them to do is block one port, so all traffic on that port is sent only to your ip address (port forwarding).

They may not be willing to do this, as they may want all users to have access to all ports, but in my opinion it would be fair to allow each user full rights to a couple random ports. Some routers (dlink for example) refer to this as a virtual server.

I could only suggest you speak directly the the admin that handles this network, he/she might be willing to give you a port, its not like there isn't enough to go around.

In any case, I wish you luck in your quest. I personally don't know of a way to optimise your performance without having the router direct the port to you.

Suspect