Decluttering The Tubes, Solutions to the BitTorrent “Problem”?
Written by Ernesto on February 01, 2008Hundreds of larger and smaller ISPs all over the world try to limit BitTorrent traffic on their networks. They often argue that they have no other options, but that’s not completely true.
There has been a lot of discussion lately about Comcast’s efforts to slow down and block BitTorrent traffic, and even the FCC got involved in it. Unfortunately, Comcast is not the only ISP engaging in this kind of behavior, many others use similar tactics.
BitTorrent throttling has been going on for a few years now, but it is getting more attention lately, because the number of people who use BitTorrent keeps growing. The traffic shaping methods used vary from ISP to ISP. Some only limit BitTorrent traffic during certain times of the day, or throttle in specific regions. Others take a more aggressive approach and prevent their customers from seeding, or even downloading .torrent files.
Some people might wonder why ISPs throttle their connection. The argument most often used is that all the BitTorrent traffic on their network slows down other customers’ connections. An argument that makes sense (if it is true), but the real problem is that ISPs tend to be secretive about their throttling efforts. If it really is that big of a problem, be open about it, and let your customers know what they can and cannot do.
Art Reisman, who is chief technical officer at APConnections - a company that happens to manufacture traffic shaping devices, lists some of the possible solutions ISPs can implement in order to cope with the “BitTorrent problem”, which he wanted to share here.
1.) Ask for voluntary cooperation.
One recourse would be to ask customers to scale back on torrents, or to use them at night or another time when network usage is low. There is plenty of precedent in the Green movement to recycle and to reduce carbon footprints. So why not a campaign to scale back BitTorrent usage ?
The downside: Can you imagine a service provider sending a letter to its customer base outlining the technical limitations of allowing unlimited BitTorrent applications, and then asking for some voluntary cooperation? Me neither. Perhaps someday, but for now providers are viewed as a profit-driven adversary by most customers.
The upside: Seems to have a warm, fuzzy, feel-good ring to it.
2.) Keep connections within the providers network.
This is the method currently practiced with help from a popular product provided by Sandvine. The basic idea is that on a large provider network there are enough BitTorrent hosts that a client need not leave the provider’s network to retrieve content.
The downside: Consumers are suspicious of providers looking at their data to make determinations on what type of traffic it is. The consumer may also not get good results if the bulk of the content were located outside their providers network; for example, if a user were to download a file that was popular in Europe, the number of servers hosting it on the Comcast network might be limited.
The upside: Consumers are still freely able to find most BitTorrent content. Providers greatly reduce connections and exchange costs with other providers.
3.) Usage based quotas.
With this method a service provider will charge much higher rates when a preset amount of data usage is exceeded over a calendar month.
The upside: This method is unobtrusive in that the provider need not look at a customer’s data, only their total usage. Experience with university residential networks has shown that once quotas are announced users voluntarily reduce their peer-to-peer or BitTorrent usage.
The downside: More complex billing detail and customer service to resolve disputes. Large providers will still compete by marketing their service as unlimited. Despite the rants about BitTorrent being a resource issue, it is still only a small percentage of total customers that use it.
4.) Limit the total connections allowed at one time per user.
The upside: It’s simple and fair to implement. Providers already set rate caps on Internet speeds, so this is just a rate cap on connections, very similar and easy to swallow for the consumer.
The downside: When users reach their allotted connection limit, all traffic on their link slows down.
5.) Build out networks to handle the increased load and pass the cost onto the consumer.
The upside: It works.
The downside: It’s most likely not economically sustainable. Without some other form of mitigation, the public’s appetite for content appears insatiable.
6.) Cancel the service of users who abuse their privileges. There have been reports of providers doing this already.
The upside: It moves an unprofitable customer off your network and onto a competitor.
The downside: Customers begin to despise you.
Here at TorrentFreak we have discussed some of these alternatives before, and in the long run there is really only one solution that is acceptable. The Internet is only a few years old, if the plan is to keep using it in the future, ISPs need to upgrade their networks. So, invest in more Internet gateway capacity, 10Gbps interconnect ports, and peering agreements. BitTorrent users are not the problem, they only signal that the ISPs need to upgrade their capacity, because customers will only get more demanding in the future. The Internet is not only about sending email, and browsing on text based websites anymore.
Art Reisman told TorrentFreak that that there are two solutions that make sense to him: “Raise rates per usage volume instead of flat rates, if it can be kept simple! Second is to limit customer connections as a resource.” Charging for bandwidth uses makes sense indeed, as long as the prices are reasonable. The second option of limiting the number of connections only looks like a temporary fix though.
What do you think?
Previously: Rambo’s Armed Guard Anti-Piracy Measures Torn Apart By Industry Insider
Next: Sweden Warns Kids Against The Pirate Bay
99 Responses (Add yours or TrackBack)
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 » Show All
Move to Europe, or even better, Norway, and get fiber almost wherever you are. 100 Mbit (L)
There is another option that was not listed. Flag P2P traffic as “bulk data” and prioritize other traffic. Let P2P traffic “fill the tubes”, but not get in the way of other, more interactive stuff.
Also, getting BT to prioritize local connections (same ISP), is easily done by providing symmetric lines (or even asymmetric the “wrong” way). Due to ADSL, the fastest nodes, which will be prioritized, are NEVER on my ISPs network, but mostly long-haul (cross continents).
“theres take a more aggressive approach and prevent their customers from seeding, or even downloading .torrent files.”
Just as an fyi if your ISP does this find a tracker which you can access via https (where the url looks like https://www.YourTrackerHere.org etc) and your .torrent files will download as seamlessly as usual. The second best fix is to use a tracker that hosts zipped .torrent files as an alternative to the usual ones. This only adds one step to the process where you open your zip program to access the .torrent file.
Another solution is to right click the .torrent and do a “Save As” then change the extension from .torrent to .txt. Once it is downloaded, simply change the extension back to .torrent (this works with varying degrees of success).
The technology war against filesharing continues.
This has to be the worst article I can remember reading on torrentfreak in a long time. I’m sorry to say this, but it’s the truth.
[quote comment="278961"]Only noobs turn their computer off at night. Probably the same jerks that leave everyone stuck at 99% for weeks til they decide to reopen their torrent client.[/quote]
Yeah right.. Just like when I downloaded a movie from a private site and startet seeding at TPB because 5 or 6 people were stuck at 83%? I didn’t downloaded anything from TPB but I shared with them, shared until I there were 4 people that had 100%. I turn my computer off, electricity is so fucking expensive in Norway!
[quote comment="279024"]Move to Europe, or even better, Norway, and get fiber almost wherever you are. 100 Mbit (L)[/quote]
Stavanger, Sandefjord og noen andre steder er eneste med fiber. Sverige er derimot landsdekket med fiber.
There are better solutions, i have listed some of these here:
http://www.azureuswiki.com/index.php/User:The8472/P2PvsISPs
simply the market will evolve as new fiber optic cables are installed and the isps will either get involved with this or disappear the way the dinosaurs do.
It’s a buyers market, and while it’s that, they’ll simply have to expand their network capacity. That simple :)
[quote]2.) Keep connections within the providers network.[/quote]
This doesn’t help a bit. Data transfer is already cheap as in very cheap. (except for a few exceptions, like Australia to the rest of world)
Considering the caps being discussed are all in the sub 100GB per month, it is clear that it isn’t the backbone bandwidth that is the problem, but the last mile.
Keeping traffic within a provider network won’t solve the problem at all, as the traffic still has to travel on the congested last mile (or several miles).
The problem is with the ISPs that have failed in their responsibility to keep the infrastructure up to date, or invested too much in non scalable infrastructure (which I think is the main problem for cable companies).
“The Internet is not only about sending email, and browsing on text based websites anymore.”..WELL SAID!!!
Here is one simple ’stop-gap’ solution to one aspect of the ISP’s ‘P2P problem’. But it will take the co-operation of the user and the entire Bittorrent community.
Lets take the ‘movie’ downloader, he/she wants a good quality file in a user friendly format. Most will download an ‘AVI/DivX’ format file, which will be anywhere between 700MB and 1.3GB per movie. But…….
What if that file was in a MP4 format!!, MP4 with its high compression rates could near enough halve the file size..
Half the file size equates to less bandwidth usage does it not?… Now I realise that everyone who has bought a standalone DVD player which is DivX compatable is not simply going to throw them away.. But its a simple conversion from MP4 to AVI/DivX with the right software and the relevant codecs installed aye?
What also if the Bittorrent community (and the scene) banned DVD-rips and other files sized over eg: 2gigs, and also banned especially the recent Blueray etc rips with 8gigs…? I mean if you want the DVD/Blueray/HDDvd (with menus and extras) buy the bleedin’ thing.
Most here will know that they can bypass bittorrent and other P2P applications if the wish to watch or even download certain Television series or Films. Stage6 allows you download the (DivX) file, and certain browser addons allow to download from sites such as Gubba and Youtube etc.
Admittedly the ISP’s need to upgrade the infrastructure (which in my opinion should be ‘State Owned’ by the public rather than in private and share holders hands, or is that too socialist for some here?), but surely we as individuals can lessen the load on that infrastructure simply by ethical consumerism.
:0o XD
Do you think that ppl want a 10/20mbit to dl mail and surf a bit? Cmon!
IMHO the solution is to upgrade infrastructures and give to the customers what they pay for, 24/7!
And @62
What also if the Bittorrent community (and the scene) banned DVD-rips and other files sized over eg: 2gigs, and also banned especially the recent Blueray etc rips with 8gigs…? I mean if you want the DVD/Blueray/HDDvd (with menus and extras) buy the bleedin’ thing.
Are you joking? That’s quite mad.
So why do not ban movies and share only txt, jpeg and mp3! YEEEAHH!
[quote comment="279240"]
What if that file was in a MP4 format!!, MP4 with its high compression rates could near enough halve the file size..
[/quote]
Look at the anime sub community. They were among the first to adopt mp4. Has the file sizes decreased?
In a few cases yes, although not nearly by 50%. In most cases though, no. Sometimes the size has remained the same, leading to an increase in quality. And sometimes the size has been increased to allow for even better quality at HD resolution.
[quote comment="279240"]
What also if the Bittorrent community (and the scene) banned DVD-rips and other files sized over eg: 2gigs, and also banned especially the recent Blueray etc rips with 8gigs
[/quote]
Banning, what people want and instead giving them what they don’t want sounds a lot like the soviet plan economy failure. While I am not anti communist as some people, I atleast recognize that plan economy was one of the big failures of the soviet era communism.
“Its also widley accepted by VM customers ‘in the know’ that VM dont tell the greater majority jack shit. none is a perfect example of that fact. If you donr frequent the virginmedia website, digitalspy, or VM newsgroups, chances are you know absolutely nothing about their traffic management”
the guide i gave was a estimate off the top of my head from what id vaugly remebered reading a while back, i knew enuff to keep me from being capped and i download about 100 gig a month and iv never had grief with my speed. But ya dont expect VM to tell you these things, but at least there wrote plain an simple on there web site
[quote comment="279324"]
Are you joking? That’s quite mad.
So why do not ban movies and share only txt, jpeg and mp3! YEEEAHH![/quote]
Are jpegs, text files, and mp3’s big sod-off 2-8Gig files?
Get a grip lad.
The issue being discussed is not copyright, its about bandwidth, and therefore file size. If anyone wants to upload a 2-8Gig file to bittorrent, then it should be copyright free. If not, then they can host it somewhere, could’nt they?
[quote comment="279331"]
Banning, what people want and instead giving them what they don’t want sounds a lot like the soviet plan economy failure. While I am not anti communist as some people, I atleast recognize that plan economy was one of the big failures of the soviet era communism.[/quote]
Do you know the difference between ‘communism’ and socialism?
Brighthouse Networks/Road Runner (USA) do not throttle back to the best of my knowledge. Had no issues on capping or throttle backs since I’ve been with them.
And when it comes to bandwidth, it’s not just movies and music being downloaded, you have to take into account ALL of the streaming video sites, Google Video, YouTube, Porno Tube and that’s just 3 of the many that are out there.
If the ISP’s can’t supply what they are selling, then they shouldn’t be selling it. And if anyone chooses an ISP who throttles back or limits speed (unless like in Australia you have no choice as all ISP’s do that) then you are an idiot for not reading the fine print before getting your connection and you have no one to blame but yourself.
Period. End of subject IMO.
Man I hate the monthly total bandwidth limits…good thing there is another ISP here. But in this day and age files are getting larger and the bandwidth limits are ridiculously small jeesh
You are sold an expensive car for a premium that can drive 200 MPH and later on they tell you that you are only allowed to drive 80 MPH with it on their highway because there are so many people who bought a car from them and want to use it when and how they like… And don’t you dare to use the car on Mondays and Fridays and between 4 and 7 o’clock.
I say invest in more and better highways instead of trying to only favor your shareholders and your bonus.
is this a good site?
http://wua.la/en/home.html
“Wuala, your free online hard-disk
Wuala is a new way of storing, sharing, and publishing files on the internet. It’s a free desktop application for Windows, Mac, and Linux that brings you a convenient and secure online storage. Unlike traditional online storage systems, Wuala is decentralized and can harness idle resources of participating computers to build a large, secure, and reliable online storage. This new technology has a number of advantages and it allows us to provide you a better service for free.
Access, share and publish files
You can use Wuala to upload a file and access it from anywhere else, even when your computer is offline. Or you can use it to share files such as photos, videos, music, or documents with friends or groups. Furthermore, you can publish files for the whole world to see. In the public area, you can search and browse for what others have published. You can store any file you want in any size you want. Downloads are fast and there are no traffic limits.
Get as much storage as you like
You start with 1 GB provided by us. If you want more, you can simply trade some space on your hard disk for additional online storage. The idea behind Wuala is not to give you more storage in total (apart from the first GB provided by us), but to change the quality of your storage: It is able to transform local storage into online storage that can be accessed from anywhere and at any time, even when your computer is offline.
Security and privacy
Wuala is secure and protects your privacy: All files you store are encrypted such that only you and those authorized by you can access them. All encryption and decryption is performed locally and your password is never sent to us - so not even we can access your files.
Free, convenient desktop application
Wuala comes as a convenient desktop application for Windows, Mac, and Linux. After a quick download, Wuala is ready. It is integrated into your operating system so that you can conveniently drag and drop files, upload files in the background, open files in your favorite application, and stream media files directly.”
I have no fucking clue, it’s new, someone know?
strongly agree with comment 1
Pay per play is fine with me. Give us monthly GB allotment, like they do with minutes on cell phone carriers. In return, give us faster upload speeds. Probably won’t happen since companies are too busy lying to customers about billing practices and the services provided.
At worst, a person will download x hours of movies (even HD movies) a month; most people will download an average of x - k1 movies a month.
At worst a person will download y albums a month; most people will download an average of y - k2 albums a month.
There is a finite number of people;
therefore, at most, there is a finite amount of data downloaded (transferred) every month.
If there was bandwidth for at least this amount of data, then no one would ever have any problem again.
If there was more than this amount of bandwidth, then it would never be used:
People would have to quit their fulltime jobs, and start sleeping 3 hours less a night, in order to have the time to watch everything they normally do + the excess; not gonna happen:)
really the bad part is that sometimes you are stuck with your ISP. Where I live there is only one provider and no one else. This company who I wont mention “cough: comcast has a monopoly in the area for cable. I could go dsl but I wont since It is more expensive here and has less bandwidth. Satalite is an option that I dont even care to deal with. Supposedly comcast has a fibre optic network capable of handling the traffic but if thats the case it sucks here and needs to be replaced with the optics from the roswell crash..lol
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 » Show All
Add your response