Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > Orcon and P2P: Limiting?

Reply
Thread Tools

Orcon and P2P: Limiting?

 
 
Mark
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-03-2005
Are Orcon limiting P2P on the UBS 256 offering?
Thanks
Mark


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
A.D.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-04-2005
Mark wrote:
> Are Orcon limiting P2P on the UBS 256 offering?
> Thanks
> Mark
>
>


Yes, packet shaping on certain ports used by P2P. Read back thru the
nz.comp history to see the big stream of conversations.

A.D.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Kristofer Clayton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-04-2005
On Mon, 4 Jul 2005 07:25:44 +1200, "Mark" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Are Orcon limiting P2P on the UBS 256 offering?


Yes, makes you want to rename BitTorrent to BitTrickle.

--
Kristofer Clayton (KJClayton)
Gisborne, New Zealand
 
Reply With Quote
 
Stephen Worthington
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-04-2005
On Mon, 4 Jul 2005 01:33:44 UTC, "A.D." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Mark wrote:
> > Are Orcon limiting P2P on the UBS 256 offering?
> > Thanks
> > Mark
> >
> >

>
> Yes, packet shaping on certain ports used by P2P. Read back thru the
> nz.comp history to see the big stream of conversations.
>
> A.D.


Are you sure it is Orcon doing the shaping? I am currently having a
problem with my World-Net 256 kibit/s bitsream connection where they
tell me it is Telecom doing the shaping. If I max out the connection
with international traffic, after a while the speed drops to only 5
kibytes/s. As soon as I stop all traffic momentarily, the speed goes
back up to something like the normal 32 kibytes/s.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Alameda
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-04-2005

"Kristofer Clayton" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Mon, 4 Jul 2005 07:25:44 +1200, "Mark" <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>makes you want to rename BitTorrent to BitTrickle.


Haha, too true. We hear so much about BitTorrent being "the most efficient
way of distributing large files" blah blah blah. Yeah, right. I could
receive it faster if someone hand-fed each byte of data required to a
carrier pigeon and spewed it out it's ass while I hold a wine glass
underneath.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Richard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-04-2005
A.D. wrote:
> Mark wrote:
>
>> Are Orcon limiting P2P on the UBS 256 offering?
>> Thanks
>> Mark
>>
>>

>
> Yes, packet shaping on certain ports used by P2P. Read back thru the
> nz.comp history to see the big stream of conversations.


I can still get good speeds on the torrents, but as soon as a single http
download is opened, that rockets up to 28k/sec and the torrents just grind to a
halt till the http is finished. really annoying.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Dave - Dave.net.nz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-04-2005
Stephen Worthington wrote:
>>>Are Orcon limiting P2P on the UBS 256 offering?


>>Yes, packet shaping on certain ports used by P2P. Read back thru the
>>nz.comp history to see the big stream of conversations.


> Are you sure it is Orcon doing the shaping? I am currently having a
> problem with my World-Net 256 kibit/s bitsream connection where they
> tell me it is Telecom doing the shaping. If I max out the connection
> with international traffic, after a while the speed drops to only 5
> kibytes/s. As soon as I stop all traffic momentarily, the speed goes
> back up to something like the normal 32 kibytes/s.


Telecom allocate the ISPs 24kbit/s per 256kbit/s customer... so it is
technically true... but ISPs can further shape this so that
http/pop3/smtp/ftp is prioritised over any other traffic if they so please.

--
http://dave.net.nz <- My personal site.
http://synaptic.net.nz <- Dunedin Based IT and ISP services
 
Reply With Quote
 
Dave Taylor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-05-2005
"Alameda" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in news:42c8f84e$(E-Mail Removed):

> Yeah, right. I could
> receive it faster if someone hand-fed each byte of data required to a
> carrier pigeon and spewed it out it's ass while I hold a wine glass
> underneath.
>


Been done:
http://news.com.com/2100-1001-257064.html?legacy=cnet

--
Ciao, Dave
 
Reply With Quote
 
Alameda
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-05-2005

"Dave Taylor" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Xns968AC7E20D955daveytaynospamplshot@203.97.3 7.6...
> "Alameda" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
> news:42c8f84e$(E-Mail Removed):
>
>> Yeah, right. I could
>> receive it faster if someone hand-fed each byte of data required to a
>> carrier pigeon and spewed it out it's ass while I hold a wine glass
>> underneath.
>>

>
> Been done:
> http://news.com.com/2100-1001-257064.html?legacy=cnet
>


))))) Hehe, on reflection I wish my original analogy was expressed
somewhat more eloquently.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Stephen Worthington
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-05-2005
On Mon, 4 Jul 2005 19:05:34 UTC, "Dave - Dave.net.nz"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Stephen Worthington wrote:
> >>>Are Orcon limiting P2P on the UBS 256 offering?

>
> >>Yes, packet shaping on certain ports used by P2P. Read back thru the
> >>nz.comp history to see the big stream of conversations.

>
> > Are you sure it is Orcon doing the shaping? I am currently having a
> > problem with my World-Net 256 kibit/s bitsream connection where they
> > tell me it is Telecom doing the shaping. If I max out the connection
> > with international traffic, after a while the speed drops to only 5
> > kibytes/s. As soon as I stop all traffic momentarily, the speed goes
> > back up to something like the normal 32 kibytes/s.

>
> Telecom allocate the ISPs 24kbit/s per 256kbit/s customer... so it is
> technically true... but ISPs can further shape this so that
> http/pop3/smtp/ftp is prioritised over any other traffic if they so please.
>


Ouch! Only 24 kibits/s - that is 10.7% of the maximum bandwidth
usage. That seems way low to me. I would have thought they would
have needed 30% or so, to cope with the peak usage.

Still, I would not mind too much if they just handled congestion
sensibly and left the rest to the ISPs. But what is happening to me
is that they are targetting the international traffic usage only, and
that makes no sense at all as World-Net has their own international
connections and does not use Telecom bandwidth for that. So if the
traffic shaping I am seeing is really supposed to be dealing with the
24 kibits/s allowance, it makes no sense at all to leave the national
traffic untouched. My guess is that they are still trying to make the
bitstream connections work badly for other ISPs to drive people to
sign up with them. In other words, unfair competition by a monopoly
provider.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Orcon's Forums (for orcon users) Nova NZ Computing 13 03-18-2006 12:50 AM
Orcon UBS 2MBit or stick with Telecom/Orcon 2MBit ADSL? Jamie Kahn Genet NZ Computing 3 04-29-2005 10:10 PM
changing from Orcon UBS to Orcon Jetstream Brendan NZ Computing 2 02-25-2005 08:39 AM
Orcon News and Email servers Brendan NZ Computing 18 08-06-2004 11:22 AM
Orcon's Freehost errors and alternative hosting options Max Quordlepleen NZ Computing 8 11-13-2003 07:53 PM



Advertisments