uTorrent 2.0 To Eliminate The Need For ISP Throttling
Written by Ernesto on October 31, 2009BitTorrent Inc. is about to launch a completely improved implementation of the BitTorrent protocol that will benefit both users and ISPs. uTorrent 2.0, which is currently being tested by thousands of people, will eliminate the need for ISPs to throttle or stop BitTorrent traffic, and will optimize the download experience for its users.
ISPs have been throttling BitTorrent traffic for years already. Although the true reasons for this are not always clear, some ISPs have argued that a high number of BitTorrent connections are slowing down other applications and traffic.
In early 2007, when network neutrality was still a non-issue for most people, BitTorrent inventor Bram Cohen told us that ISPs should find a way to cope with BitTorrent.
“ISPs have to invest in making their networks better and faster rather than stifling applications which consumers use and love,” he said, while encouraging users to switch to non throttling ISPs if possible, or complain to their ISP’s customer services.
A lot of things have changed in the years that followed. Comcast started to prevent its users from seeding content on BitTorrent, and many other ISPs took similar actions to throttle BitTorrent traffic. As a direct result, network neutrality was placed on the political agenda in many countries. It also inspired BitTorrent Inc. to look for solutions that would eliminate the need for throttling entirely, solving the problem at its root.
This is where uTP comes in. uTP is a new and improved implementation of the BitTorrent protocol which is designed to be network friendly. The current implementation often causes interference with other applications, which is the main reason why ISPs try to slow it down, or even stop it altogether. uTP aims to solve this problem.
With uTP, uTorrent (and the Mainline client) will become network aware by throttling itself if congestion in the network is detected. This will have a huge impact on ISP networks according to Simon Morris, BitTorrent’s VP of Product Management. “If uTP is successful it should result in a multi-billion dollar windfall in terms of savings for ISPs,” Morris told TorrentFreak
This means that the new uTorrent will eliminate the need for ISPs to throttle BitTorrent traffic in their networks. Of course, uTorrent users will also be affected by the new protocol. When needed, uTorrent will decrease the upload or download speed to avoid congestion.
According to Morris it’s mainly the upload speed that will be affected. “The throttling that matters most is actually not so much the download but rather the upload – as bandwidth is normally much lower UP than DOWN, the up-link will almost always get congested before the down-link does,” he explained.
“uTP measures the time a packet takes to get sent from peer A to peer B, so in theory uTP will detect congestion anywhere on that path, although in practice the congestion most often happens somewhere on the first-mile uplink connection.”
So does this mean that the new uTorrent will result in slower download times? Not necessarily. Since there is less congestion, uTorrent users will experience no slowdowns in web-browsing, and ideally less congestion and a more efficient use of the network may result in faster download speeds. uTP is currently being tested in uTorrent v2.0 beta and thus far none of the testers have reported any significant problems.
“There are already a couple of hundred thousand people using our v2.0 beta client, and things seem to be progressing very nicely. Our v2.0 client will initiate outgoing uTP connections by default whenever it can. Previous versions of our clients will accept incoming uTP connections – they just won’t initiate them,” Morris said.
“We’re excited that this creates a better experience for millions of consumers, and it also potentially has a massive impact on ISPs – greatly reducing (even eliminating) any justification to manage or shape BitTorrent traffic and allowing ISP networks to handle more BitTorrent traffic, without resulting congestion forcing capital network upgrades ahead of schedule or the ‘need’ to invest in DPI or other traffic shaping gear.”
It is hard to tell if uTP really is BitTorrent’s savior (some highly doubt it), but if it lives up to the expectations it will be beneficial to both users and ISPs. The specs for uTP will eventually be open so other clients will have the opportunity to implement it too. However, since uTorrent and the Mainline client together are used by two thirds of all BitTorrent users, the effects should be immediately noticeable to both those users and ISPs.
Previously: BitTorrent Meets IMDb on Files24
Next: UK-T Shut Down For Good, Database Deleted
185 Responses
Weird. I hope it works.
ISPs need to adjust to the consumers – not other way round
Does anyone know if this new protocol will be using UDP, like they’ve been hinting at, or does it still stick with TCP. To my knowledge, that’s the main issue since TCP creates so much overhead with acknowledgement packets and error control. While negligent with most other protocols (that pull from one source per connection), bittorrent makes many MANY connections to multiple hosts, and that drastically increases the TCP “bloat”.
A good idea! Let’s see it in action, now…
this is great but what we really want is some form anonymity to keep away prying eyes, come up with this and the whole p2p scene will be revolutionised
Note that some private torrent sites, e.g. TorrentLeech, bans the use of uTorrent 2.0. No idea why but it’s annoying. Agree with bald1@5 – anonymity is the most vital issue affecting P2P.
This can be actually very bad.
Any sign of cooperation between large corporations and the most popular bittorrent client should be looked at with extreme caution.
I think there are some possible negative scenarios:
1. uTorrent creates a new CLOSED protocol, which only uTorrent app can handle.
2. uTorrent creates a new easy-to-control-by-isp protocol, and tells big ISPs exactly how to throttle, slow and block it.
3. uTorrent creates a new protocol which makes it easier to track who downloads what exactly. People become masively sued over downloading from BT.
—–
NEVER trust the corporations completely. Corporations are our enemy. Their only real ally is money.
—–
NEVER trust completely a closed source app. P2P apps should only be open source so they can be controlled by society, not by money&corporations.
I think uTorrent will go “bad” and join the music/movie industry sooner
…or later.
@6, because it’s a beta, and many private trackers ban betas.
“The specs for uTP will eventually be open so other clients will have the opportunity to implement it too.”
Fcuk you very much!
@bald1 the revolution is already underway, http://itshidden.com/
@7
Did you even read the article?
“The specs for uTP will eventually be open so other clients will have the opportunity to implement it too.”
Sometimes it’s good to be paranoid, and sometimes you just have to read what it says before you judge it.
This should be nice, especially if it uses UDP since torrents have so much error-checking in the protocol as it is, so we don’t need TCP error checking too :p.
I think utorrent is digging it’s grave now.
Um this kinda is a bad idea atm, it would been good say 2 years ago but now it will give the isp another reason to sit on their current slow ass old hardware for another few years and continue to screw the customer over.
this is excellent news, it will increase download speeds by eliminating congestion in the last mile. in doing so it will decrease overall network traffic for ISPs because of the reduced error traffic and data resends
we have known for many years the necessity to cap the upload speed in the client to permit bandwidth for the tcp overhead (and when the downpipe is at maximum flow it is also wise to cap it to 80% of its maximum)
the people who are criticising uTP and Bittorent Inc’s involvement with big business are wrong on all points
the real bad news is for Tribler’s ‘give 2 get’ bit currency exchange system. uTP breaks Tribler. Bram warned them that going against the ‘tit 4 tat’ ethos of bittorrent would end in tears. any ratio system in bittorrent is evil
http://www.h33t.com welcomes uTP and thanks Bram. next project please Bram address anonymising and deliver a SSH2 plugin for uTorrent, we are ready and waiting and will deliver an SSH2 tracker if you deliver the SSH2 client functionality
@7 What is closed with http://www.bittorrent.org/beps/bep_0029.html ?
@7 In the event of any of those scenarios, we’ll all shrug and go back to using the older protocol?
It could but I think it won’t because the problem I think is that ISP’s don’t want to pay for the peering agreements, ISP don’t mind their own networks being floaded what they don’t like is to have to pay other networks. P2P basically destroy that economic way of thinking because everybody end up uploading more then they download.
I think people will continue using utorrent and won’t notice much of a difference.
ISP throttling will not stop until there are laws forbidding it.
ISP are increasingly in bed with the entertainment industry and they will make everything they can to stifle competition.
Many ISPs today throttle not only P2P but youtube and others video or audio related streams any one thinks that is an accident?
And I’m off to download BitComet…
So,now,someone plz seed all the DL DVD of David Attenborough “The Living Planet” @TPB!..horrah!!!
i care more about upload, rather than download speed. for those of us with ratios on a bunch of private sites to maintain, it may end up curbing how much we can up :/
Why is this a good thing? It’s exactly the same thing as your ISP throttling traffic — which I have no problem as long as they’re throttling all traffic and doing it only during periods of high usage that necessitates it (ie, not throttling for the sake of throttling).
All this does is pass the buck on to the client and consumer so they’re throttling themselves. Presumably, this means your client will throttle itself if it detects that the network is overloaded… even if that overloaded network is due to everyone else who isn’t using a client that behaves this way.
And, most importantly, why is this necessary if all 99% of users do with their internet access is check their email and look up the sports scores, as all the major ISP CEOs claim?
Also, bandwidth is not “usually very limited *UP*”. Yes, your ISP limits your upload bandwidth, but the pipe is the same size whether it’s going up or down. The upload speed cap is simply a manufactured limit by your ISP to keep you in check so you’re not running a webserver or email server without paying them big bucks for a business tier of service.
smells a bit fishy to me <_<
donno why i think that utorrent is helping anti-piracy groups somehow !!!
I noticed uTP in uTorrent 1.8.4 and luckily I found a way to disable it, because it messed up my seeding and instead of maxing out, the speed varied dramatically.
It turned out that there was a 1.9 or 2.0 among my peers who literally ruined the entire seeding for everybody. I also noticed that there were many similar complaints on the uTorrent BBS and they were trivialized and ignored and having nothing to do with uTP.
Luckily I found a way to disable your uTP and it was brilliant again. Speed maxed out, the 1.9 and 2.0 behaved perfectly. So I am not impressed with uTP and prefer to disable it altogether.
eventually open doesn’t sound good
The “user friendly” way to disable uTP once and for all, because a single slow peer literally cripples and halfs your upload bandwidth and therefore hurts the entire swarm.
Preferences -> Advanced Settings -> bt.trans_disposition set to 5
Notice how deep that option was hidden to discourage people from banning their uTP
“According to Morris it’s mainly the upload speed that will be affected.”
Well, Mr. Morris. When you speak about torrents and P2P, decreasing upload speed means that this will decrease the download speed too, because we all know that if the seed isn’t enough, downloading is quite difficult and even impossible. :) As for uTP – hopefully this will resolve some ISP-issues. But I agree with Bram Cohen – ISPs should upgrade their networks. They steal enough money from their clients. Better invest them in something useful. |-(
@7: uTorrent always was bad from day 1 because uTorrent has always been proprietary software. Users are prohibited from inspecting, changing, or sharing modified versions of this proprietary software. Regardless of what uTorrent purports to implement, one can never trust that any proprietary program does only what the user wants it to do. Therefore uTorrent is no contribution to the free world, despite currently implementing a free protocol. Retain your software freedom and control over your computer: run only free software Bittorrent applications.
uTorrent repports back to the BitTorrent overmasters – lawsuits – treat with caution
ok so, i install a client that caps itself instead of my isp?
so i went to all the trouble of finding an isp that does not cap only to cap myself?
lol
ok so, i install a client that caps itself instead of my isp?
so i went to all the trouble of finding an isp that does not cap only to cap myself?
lol
this will stifle internet development, as isp’s will not have to upgrade their networks
” 32 Nov 01, 2009 at 01:10 by FreakaZoid
uTorrent repports back to the BitTorrent overmasters – lawsuits – treat with caution”
Proof of this is where?
Oh right, nowhere because it doesn’t.
BitComet on the other hand.
The points everyone reading should take note of are these two statements:
“If uTP is successful it should result in a multi-billion dollar windfall in terms of savings for ISPs,”
and
“This means that the new uTorrent will eliminate the need for ISPs to throttle BitTorrent traffic in their networks.”
Perhaps i’m too jaded and cynical, but i immediately read that to mean “uT will now make it possible for less traffic consumption giving the ISP’s a windfall, but the greedy corporations will amazingly STILL throttle/cap BT traffic, thus maximizing their profit margin exponentially”
Because at the end of the day, these corporate ISP’s sole purpose is to obtain moooooar $$$ for their shareholders, and this gives them a new incentive to do abso.fuqn.lutely nothing differently, so they can make themselves moar money for providing less service, ie: the Corporate Doctrine.
Just my $.02
I’m unsure if this is a wise idea.
The needs of the consumer, pirate or not, are growing. The demand for more and more content including bandwidth eating high-definition media and sharing of information, legal or illegal, is the way the future is moving.
Our demand for sharing data of all kinds will continue to increase. No one should help decrease the load on the networks otherwise it will encourage ISP’s to never consider upgrading their systems.
ISP’s should always be upgrading their systems. Just imagine what the demand will be on our networks in 10 and 20 years time. Our networks are already obsolete and just like our own home computers they too need to upgrade the networks.
Don’t discourage the growth and upgrades of our networks. They must evolve and adapt to our needs or else innovation and technological evolution will stagnate.
…on that note…I’m sure .neo.troll and Reasoned Troll would love us to all go back to tuning in to staticky AM radio, the soft blue glow of black and white TV, wind up telephones and listening to 78-speed records on hand powered grammophones…all of which do not encourage the free sharing of information.
This is why information sharing should never be stopped. As a technologically “advanced” race…we should never be allowed to go backwards.
I agree with that this may help the congestion but it’s a bandaid for a bigger problem, ISPs shouldn’t be throttling period, and this may help them but it’s not legislation to force their hand. And I agree, the thing we want more is a privacy feature that keeps us hidden instead of some network wide crap. Make a client that doesn’t have to interact with ip’s and network masks and then talk.
This sounds good in theory, but one thing that one is mentioning is the fact that torrents are only as fast as the seeders/leechers allow it to be. It would be great if this helps out ISPS to the point that they do stop throttling customers IE: Virgin and Comcast. But more and more people are turning to seed boxes especially on private sites. So all these people saying this is going to speed up your downloads, it’s only going to speed it up if people actually change their upload limit. You can’t constantly blame ISPS for slow traffic when you download one file from say TPB with 200 leechers 100 seeders and can only hit 200KB/s when the same file on a decent pvt site can hit 2.2MB/s
BitTorrent Overlords being BitComet….They’re on to you..
Look out for the brown envelopes…but they won’t contain bribes
You PAY for bandwidth. If you ISP is throttling your connection for ANY reason, threaten to SUE! They are guilty of BREACH OF CONTRACT and you can collect damages.
cool…now i can get trottled by my ISP and by utorrent….d/l 0.9 anyone?
“on that note…I’m sure .neo.troll and Reasoned Troll would love us to all go back to tuning in to staticky AM radio, the soft blue glow of black and white TV, wind up telephones and listening to 78-speed records on hand powered grammophones…all of which do not encourage the free sharing of information.”
No! I’m indeed very happy with Computers, CDs DVDs massive hard drives to store my CDs so I can use my jukebox software to stream my legally purchased tracks around my 5 bedroomed house. I just don’t agree with stealing and not purchasing media to sate your appetite for illicit free media.
You can’t have any valid arguments or you would need to resort to personal attacks to divert attention away from your addictions to so called free stuff.
I suppose you’ll be demanding free weed and heroin next? Or is it called methadone?
Article somewhat lacking in a fundamental understanding of the difference between udp and tpc.
Anyway should be good all round.
My VPN gets me nice speeds of 150-225kB/s so why do I need uTorrent2.0?
When ISP throttle I get 25kB/s!!
If I sue though , isn’t that a bit hypocritical as technically, I could be sued for illegal filesharing?
The sooner I can move to 1MB/s the better. Hell, I might start sellin some of this shit and make some real money like the TPB crew. Should help pay the fines, too. LOL
http://www.whyweprotest.org/en/
If I notice uTorrent slowing my speeds when this 2.0 comes out I’ll be moving to Transmission or something else.
@46
No, cause all you download all day long is Linux distros… right? That’s what I only download…
Oh no I got burned!
http://www.flayme.com/troll/
@ 42 “SueYourISP”.
Hi there,
Very interesting scenario.
Can you direct me to your blog where you outline the precedent you have set?
http://torrent.ubuntu.com:6969/
What I can’t work out though, is why my IP add came up on coksuckrs dream torrent, according to ACS:Law? Well I’ll see them in court LOL
Ahhhh OK
@42 & @51
Yep link to the blog, lets assert our rights. We deamnd free media at the fatest possible rates available, stop throttling, just so people can dload their emails faster or game with lower pings, to$$ers!
@49, no I get me Linux via Custom PC and Personal Computer World.
I torrent movies games and TV shows, don’t you?
people are missing the point that the default configuration of most clients is going to cause congestion in the last mile as soon as the max upload rate is reached. people dont realise that the max upload rate of an unthrottled client is a congested state
there are always expert filesharers who know how to tune their clients but the vast majority of people simply fire and forget. uTP provides a default uncongested configuration for the most common use of the client
not only does uTP assist desktop clients, it is clearly a huge development for the further deployment of bittorrent into services where configuration is disabled for the user e.g. bittorrent TV, bittorrent set-top boxes and bittorrent mobile
http://www.h33t.com who trusts Bram implicitly, his reasoning is absolutely sound
wow, what a super way to kill off microtorrent.
sure, if everyone would use utp, average upload and download speeds might actually improve. but, seeing how it also limits individual bandwidth usage, everyone will have an incentive to switch to a torrent client that doesn’t make use of utp (unless, of course, there is an option in microtorrent to disable the use of utp; in either case, network congestion will still remain a problem).
indeed, i think we have a textbook example of a tragedy of the commons here people. what’s left to see, of course, is how well microtorrent has managed to lock-in its users.
People bitching about new protocol will finish leeching 10 minutes earlier with old one, close torrent client – and start bitching about high latency in their favorite online game.
Reasonable QoS (i.e., protocols prioritizing, not bandwidth capping) is good. Takes lots of effort and money to do on ISP side, so it is good, that Bram is doing it client-side.
How would you like to be unable to use Skype or play online games because Johns Sixpack from the hood have congested DSLAM uplink – they probably need to download new Jackson movie badly, who cares about your Skype?
You’re not going to die if you wait 20 minutes longer on download, while this will do good for all internet users, pipes need to be unclogged.
ISPs design and build residential networks assuming that full bandwidth is not used all the time – or your home broadband would cost 10 times more to cover it. No point in spending millions when 95% of users just want to check email.
There is a solution: top-tier ISPs provide guaranteed bandwidth services. You can order one of these – you will not be throttled/limited/whatever. Will cost 100 times more than your $49/month residential DSL service. Throw in several grands for MPLS (or whatever) hardware – and you’re good. :)
– Your friends at http://bitsnoop.com/
Actually IIRC uTP has some really cool NAT traversal capabilities that will allow more connections to break through nasty routers and firewalls.
It’s the opposite of what they should be doing; bypassing traffic shapers, breaking third-party control, keeping the protocol free. But no, they’re not, because this takes balls, something they no longer have.
uTorrent turned bitch.
Hold on a second… I thought uTorrent sold out to BitTorrent (the company) which has associations with Fox, and other media goons. Am I incorrect in this?
Why would I want to use a new protocol developed probably in association with the RIAA?
I stopped at utorrent 1.8.2 and that’s the last one I will use.
For those interested in settings for uTP in uTorrent, see extract below
BTW, here’s a quick FYI from the utorrent forums for anyone wondering what the transport disposition field controls and how:
For ut 1.8.3 & 1.9 bt.transp_disposition is a bitfield, so the following numbers can be ADDED or used on their own to get the desired effect:
4 – incoming TCP
8 – incoming uTP
1 – outgoing TCP
2 – outgoing uTP
Specific combinations:
5 – TCP incoming + outgoing only (uTP disabled)
10 – uTP only
13 – TCP incoming + outgoing with uTP outgoing only (*1.8.3 default)
15 – both TCP and uTP, incoming + outgoing (*1.9 default)
13’s the recommended setting for utorrent 1.8.3 and 15 for uTorrent 1.9
This is one of those statements that looks a lot like a pile of crap LoL
hmmm so when we pay for a specific upload speed from our isp, it don’t matter because it’s gonna get slowed down anyway either by the isp or the client like utorrent, who seems to be awefully close to doing a napster. dipshits, the isp’s and big business are the enemy of net neutrality and freedoms. utorrent will be gone when users figure out how they screwed us.
why not just limit ur upload?
i want anonymity not this crap :’(
when Bittorrent Inc made deals with the MAFIA sure it all looked very bad but it didnt wash out that way
Bram was trying to bring the media cartel into an economic business model in line with the reality of digital distribution in the internet age. in the event it didnt happen and the MAFIAA made a fast retreat back into their old models and decided to fight the protocol
Bittorrent Inc didnt sell out, they tried to parle with the enemy, the enemy was proven too weak to handle the proposition
we all know the problem, it is the same as the merchant wankers who have collapsed our economies and made ordinary folk pay for their multi-billion dollar bonuses. their is a select few at the top of the pile who are making billions off of the creative industry and these tossers dont care if they destroy the creative world and the music industry and the movie industry
their time on this planet is numbered because there is one thing you can not do on this planet, you cannot defeat popular culture
http://www.h33t.com says know your enemy and be not afraid of laying down your life for your brothers and sisters
@7
BitTorrent Inc (and by extension uTorrent) is partly owned by MPAA. So I wouldn’t be surprised if this protocol is made to track downloaders easier.
It’s amazing these myths still persist.
µtorrent doesn’t report back on usage.
bittorrent inc. isn’t owned by the MPAa, and the MPAA has no impact on anything they do.
These kinds of rumours are a bit baseless, and exist only to drive people away from utorrent. who would benefit from these rumours? Why, maybe the MPAA for instance?
Why, yes they would. That’s why these rumours have either been tracked back to the terminally stupid, or to groups with either a link, or suspected to have a link to antiP2P groups.
We run random wireshark monitoring of all current versions of utorrent, just to make sure these claims aren’t true. We’ve also asked people making these claims to provide evidence, they’ve never been able to do so, either it’s ‘too secret’ to tell, or it’s something they heard from someone else.
If uTP is implemented in the mainline client, then it can be implemented in all clients ’cause mainline is MIT-licensed free software.
Been using this [uTP] for about 6 months.
You won’t want to go back, it’s much better.
Good work.
you can expect faster downloads/no router crashes
Some of you guys need to get a clue, by the way.
“This protocol is sissy”
Because driving directly into a car accident at full speed is better than slowing down momentarily to go around it?
Think, people.
Just use Ubuntu and Transmission. ;-)
Wow, a whole lot of folks sure are clueless about TCP and UDP. Have all of you forgotten why every FAQ out there always recommends manually limiting the upload speed of your Bittorrent client to around 80% of tested maximum?
Letting Bittorrent use 100% of your upload bandwidth WILL result in problems. You may have trouble surfing the web for instance. Worst of all your client will have trouble handshaking with other clients and eventually your download speeds will suffer too. TCP just isn’t an efficient means of communication, especially when the traffic is Bittorrent.
UDP, on the other hand, doesn’t have all the bloated overhead that TCP does and is thus far more efficient. Instead of having to manually limit your client to around 80% like we’ve always had to do for years now, uTP/UDP will do it for us automatically. All it’s really doing is ensuring quality of service.
By switching to uTP/UDP, your client will be able to automatically use the true maximum speed your connection is capable of at any given moment. If you start surfing the web while a torrent is downloading, or you use some other application that requires priority bandwidth in a time sensitive manner (VoIP for example), your Bittorrent client will basically yield some of it’s bandwidth while that other app is in use and do so accurately.
It’s all about efficiency via network awareness folks. Trust me, a lot of people always make the same mistake when using Bittorrent for the first time. They let it use 100% of their bandwidth (which Bittorrent is more than happy to use) and end up having all kinds of problems because of it. Don’t believe me? Visit any of the forums, or better yet experiment while watching the graph in uTorrent. Without setting aside some bandwidth by manually setting a static upload speed cap (which is prone to user error and doesn’t take changing network conditions into consideration), I’m betting you will see the plotted upload rates jump all over the place with your download speed never reaching it’s full potential.
Thanks to uTP/UDP, bandwidth allocation can now be dynamic instead of static and this will be a good thing for everyone. Ever wonder why we’re also slowly heading towards UDP trackers? Same reason, for efficiency. Freeing up all the wasted bandwidth that TCP was hogging means being able to track more clients and/or torrents.
You just can’t escape progress folks. If you’re thinking of switching to a client other than uTorrent and Mainline, think again. Once uTP is fully fleshed out and bug free, ALL clients will be updated to use it as the preferred method of data transfer. How can taking away the primary excuse ISP’s use to justify their throttling practices (not to mention invasion of privacy where DPI is used) be a bad thing?
PS: If you use uTorrent, get slow speeds, and think your ISP is throttling your bandwidth, try setting encryption to forced and bt.transp_disposition to 10. This forces only encrypted uTP connections to be used and has helped me immensely on the occasional Pirate Bay torrent. Be careful though as this can actually hinder instead of help, especially when there aren’t many seeds/peers. As far as I can tell, only Bittorrent 6.1 and up (which is the Mainline one), as well as uTorrent 1.8.1 and up, actually support uTP at the moment, meaning those are the only two clients you’ll connect to.
Download µTorrent 1.6, set max upload speed to 80% of your actual upload speed (established speedtest.net for instance), and no more congestion.
This new version/feature smells like rotten elderberries.
So it defeats throttling by THROTTLING ITSELF. _no thanks_.
I did some A/B tests a while back and found uTP (1.9.0) very slow/lazy by comparisson (1.8.2).
gonna take a while for this to become useful:
1. step 1 – utorrent 2.0 needs to come out of beta
2. step 2 – utorrent users need to upgrade to 2.0 (that means convincing a lot of users to give up their beloved 1.6)
3. step 3 – deluge, vuze, mainline, halite, transmission, rtorrent etc etc need to implement utp in their code
4. step 4 – users of the above programs need to upgrade to the latest version
5. step 5 – ISP need to agree not to throttle utp traffic.
this is gonna take some time. but overall, yeah might be good when these steps are completed
“Because driving directly into a car accident at full speed is better than slowing down momentarily to go around it? Think, people.”
Very well said! People see the “slowing down” part and automatically form a bad opinion, failing to take into account the fact that it is only temporary and serves and important purpose.
uTP doesn’t waste tons of bandwidth like TCP does, helps to dynamically and accurately adjust data rates on the fly based on network conditions, helps to make sure priority bandwidth is going to where it’s needed most, and ultimately ensures quality of service for everyone. Plus it takes away the excuse ISP’s are using to justify things like deep packet inspection and throttling. This is all bad how exactly?
Once out of beta, uTP will find it’s way into every client out there so long as it works as promised. If it becomes the default means of data transfer for Bittorrent and TCP support a legacy option (or is eventually removed altogether), refusing to update your client will only make it increasingly hard to find anyone with which to connect. I’m betting quite a few uTorrent users already force uTP-only transfers, which can help get around DPI induced throttling. There was actually an article on how to do this not too long ago. Good luck connecting to them if you’ve set your client to deny uTP or aren’t using one that supports it.
“Download µTorrent 1.6, set max upload speed to 80% of your actual upload speed (established speedtest.net for instance), and no more congestion.”
How is that different than letting uTP adjust upload speeds dynamically? Manually setting your upload speed to a static 80% would be great if network conditions never changed and your maximum speed was also always static. Using uTP on a good day should give you more than 80% and on bad days less. Most days should average out to the max your connection can actually handle which just makes good sense to me.
“I did some A/B tests a while back and found uTP (1.9.0) very slow/lazy by comparisson (1.8.2).”
So did I, using 1.8.4. Encryption + uTP blew away TCP (50 to 120 kB/s versus 620 kB/s sustained). Probably not surprising seeing as my ISP uses DPI to throttle. I also played around with manually limiting my upload speed and found that allowing torrents to upload at unlimited speed really does impact download rates. Surfing tended to time out a lot too.
Can’t wait to test it!
@Reasonned Pineapples
That is indeed a fruity idea!
I don’t know how it works for you, but if I let my up maxed out, I can barely surf anymore.
My ISP doesn’t throttle, so for me it’s about comfort, so just my 2 cts.
Otherwise, I second other commenters who think that’s the ISP who has to adapt to their customers, and not the contrary, that’s why I wonder why such features are included (and by default, it seems).
We could have some kind of laser fiber going from shore to shore, with 100 megs up and down and the companies that controlled this fiber would still complain, they would still throttle. The problem isn’t the user or the equipment or the software it’s the companies that control the network. They’re trying to make excuses for more money from the customers, maybe we should think of a solution that eliminates the companies and make the network a publicly owned and run ecosystem. How? I don’t know? I do know as long as you have them (the corps) in between us and our goals we will always fall short of true Internet freedom.
REASONED MIND WROTE:
No! I’m indeed very happy with Computers, CDs DVDs massive hard drives to store my CDs so I can use my jukebox software to stream my legally purchased tracks around my 5 bedroomed house. (…)
I suppose you’ll be demanding free weed and heroin next? Or is it called methadone?
————-
Sounds like the copyright lobby is paying you alright. Have you managed to convince anyone here yet? I think not…
Free heroin – Yes, it’s easily available in parts of the UK, Netherlands and Switzerland for documented addicts. The program has been EXTREMELY successful in reducing criminality, drugtrafficing and many other serious problems stemming from drug addiction.
A good example of decision makers facing reality, adapting and making the best of a situation instead of digging their head in the sand.
Can’t wait to test it!
Game Copy Wizard
@Reasoned Pineapple
Well there you go, as you said, it was faster because your ISP uses DPI that probably hadn’t been trained to uTP yet. OK, so do you have any thoughts on what might happen once uTP is in widespread use? Do you suppose it’ll remain free from equivalent (to TCP) shaping policy because it’s potentially marginally more efficient for service providers?
If a provider delays BitTorrent transfers, whether through inadvertant congestion or purposeful manipulation, and uTP reads delay and throttles back, tell me again, how is this going to be better for BitTorrent users? Isn’t this akin to the client actively designating its own protocol as a low priority to everything else based on latency?
So many retards here.. so little time.
There are a lot of frigging retards here that really have 0 clue how it works other than they download a torrent and want it all high speed and now. Some people with some sound reasoning who understand how the networks and the protocols work.
Real simple terms. Your cable/dsl modem work on RF modulation. Think of it as the further you get away from a radio station, the more faint the signal. Same thing. The other thing is your modem is only allowed to transmit X amount of power back, which is less than the cable/phone company. (What do you expect for $100 or less for the hardware?)
That said, slower modulation types work better over longer distances or less powerful transmitters. Hence, why your upload speed on cable/dsl is typically slower than fiber when you start getting into higher speeds. This isn’t the case of an ISP trying to jack you out of bandwidth.
Cable modems use a single 6MHZ channel (until Docsis 3.0 comes out).. You can only squeeze X amount of data in a channel, this includes incoming and outgoing, not to mention your upload channel bandwidth is shrunk due modulation restrictions. Spread that around X # of people and you’ll fill up the channel quickly. Last I checked, cable modem head end hardware isn’t exactly cheap, nor are the engineers to configure both the RF and IP side (two different worlds)
Now, I’m not pro rate-limiting (in way of net neutrality tiered internet bullshit), but I am for peak times and only p2p protocols. From a business perspective, I would rather appease the masses who are trying to casual surf than field phone calls of people bitching their service is slow when they’re trying to check the weather/news/facebook/whatever.
When 90% of your bandwidth is taken up by a very small handful of users who are paying $50 or less per month, you might as well start throwing $100 bills down the toilet, it’s same concept.
That said, off peak, the cap would be removed and I’d encourage people to use the bandwidth at night. Why? Still paying for pipe whether it’s used or empty, so it might as well be busy.
uTP sounds promising. I’d almost rather see it done multicast with tcp/udp to pick up missing pieces later.. But since most ISPs don’t do multicast, that isn’t an option.
In any case, I’m done with my 5am rant. Use a search engine, read up how network protocols work, read up how cable and dsl modems work.. THEN you’ll look and be more intelligent when it comes to a protocol discussion. Also FFS try being less narcissistic, the world doesn’t revolve around you..
Finally, if you take offence to this post, GOOD! You’re the audience I’m trying to target. I’m not superior by any means, I’m just sick of people who don’t know what they’re talking about trying to justify something with no factual information or really any knowledge how it works.. Think I’m full of shit? Prove me wrong. Go reading and educate yourself.
what’s the point of utp?
with a good router that can use something like tomato and you xan configure it with QoS and use the web at full speed while maxing out your torrent downloads at the same time.
that is far superior to this utp crap because it will work with everything and you have exact control on what protocol, ports and kb amounts to prioritize.
“I don’t know how it works for you, but if I let my up maxed out, I can barely surf anymore.”
I other words, you’re agreeing with me. :)
It doesn’t matter how much speed a person has as Bittorrent will always try to use it all. If one does not limit how much upload speed it’s allowed to use so that at least a little bit is left in reserve, the result will be exactly as you described and not just with browsers but all applications that require the internet.
If you’re uploading to someone at full speed, there will be nothing left over for things like handshaking, error detection, flow control, and all the myriad of other crosstalk that needs to happen in order to not only establish connections, but also maintain them. All uTP does is try to maintain the fastest upload connection possible without causing other applications to suffer.
Instead of manually limiting your upload speed to a static 80% like most FAQ’s recommend, you let uTP dynamically adjust your upload speed on the fly. Bandwidth needs change from moment to moment depending on network usage and condition, so it makes sense to use a protocol that can adapt and change as needed from moment to moment. If you’re downloading a torrent using uTP and not doing anything else, it may decide it can use more than 80% (which is entirely possible given that UDP connections have less overhead than TCP ones). If you start surfing while downloading, uTP might limit itself to slightly less than 80%.
See, it’s not all bad. Everybody sees the word throttle and flips out. When it comes to maintaining quality of service and efficient network utilization, we can’t just lay all the burden on the ISP’s. Some of it has to fall on the people creating the programs which use those networks and it’s clear Bram Cohen agrees. uTP/UDP is how Bittorrent should have been from the start and I’m betting he had no clue just how popular and widespread his app would become.
uTP also has another side benefit besides speed that nobody seems to be mentioning. People who are behind a router that hasn’t been set up to correctly port forward will now be connectable. This means more seeds and peers on any given torrent. People need to stop getting hung up on the poor choice of words TorrentFreak has used.
So is this saying that we should have our uploads/downloads set @ 0/0 (unlimited both directions) & it will download as good as having the client set at upload 10/11 due to the differences in speed. I have had better performance from my internet connection for specifically limiting the upload to 10/11 instead of 0/0. When I set @ 0/0 my download is very slow compared to the other. Anyways,will this make it equivalent to 10/11 by having 0 on it instead using utp? If it does not alleviate this problem and downloads goes slower,than uploading @ 10/11 which is why i switch seedbox anyway, I see no need to change.
Using a seedbox, I am able to upload @ 1 gb @ download onto my hard drive on the server @ 1gb as long as the file is moving. If the file is going slow, I simply upload faster. I often seed 6-7 copies on a file using this method. if I do it at my house with the 10/11, method, I can download alot but I can’t upload for others at max speed & if I seed , it takes a long time. If I can upload & download at max speed, I see a reason to switch to this one when not wanting to use my seedbox. If it doesn’t work, no thanks, sticking to seedbox.
scratch -simply upload faster. -
should be more
“that is far superior to this utp crap”
Sure, all you need to do is get a million plus people to buy a new router and then teach the majority of them how to use it (seeing as most file sharers aren’t tech nerds).
What is the point of uTP? Why not take the time to read up on it and find out? Google is your friend.
To TF: Could we get an interview with whomever is working on uTP please? You seriously need to clear up all the negative confusion your article has caused.
i’ve been thottling my azureus for some time now cause my small town isp just can’t handle the wraith of a run away client
tcp/ip half open connection limit
max global connections
max connection per torrent
10KB/s up/down ,, sometimes a little faster ;)
etc…etc
i cut everything back ,, no point in connecting to the whole world all at once ,, then i run ur through a vpn and he’s a little happier too i suppose
if not for my ajustments ,, i’d be the only one connected in town hehehe
“With uTP, uTorrent (and the Mainline client) will become network aware by throttling itself if congestion in the network is detected”
This is not what I was hopping to hear. The last thing I want is for my bittorrent client to be aimed at saving my isp money.
This new idea will simply enable ISP’s to not upgrade their networks. I do not support this.
I don’t see the problem in making a system more efficient.
It’s like saying: “why make a car use less fuel? – it’d just stop BP from drilling for any”.
Surely if the protocol is better (and I haven’t tested to see if it is), then that means you can download/communicate more, even with capping (which is the name of the game).
As long as there really is no hidden agenda then I support it.
I admire uTorrent because it does seem to be making central innovations unlike a lot of clients who are just adding bloat.
Where can I get a copy of 2.0
already using utorrent 2.0 and it works like a charm…i cna actually achieve better speeds in it than i used to before (that’s obviously still using the same isp)
I read a lot of posts relating to UDP and TCP. While it is correct that TCP uses a lot of overhead compared to UDP, you can set up BitTorrent to use UDP protocol in a BitTorrent application already. To be honest, I think in the BitTorrent world, it doesn’t make a difference between UDP and TCP frames since BitTorrent figures out how to piece it together. Anyone can use the TCP frame in a sense of a UDP frame.
I believe BitTorrent implementation is set up such that it finds the optimal (quickest) path to a user and then uses that path extensively without recomputing Deikstra’s algorithm ever. It is a ‘direct connect’ because it relied on the network to determine the shortest path and then BitTorrent always uses this path. I bet the new protocol implements a series of pings and tries to recalibrate the shortest path, or a round robin approach where it takes the next shortest path, then the next shortest path up to an arbitrary number (let’s say 5). So the protocol uses the 5 shortest paths to move the bitTorrent traffic to the destination and 5 different paths on the way back…
On a small scale this seems really simple to calculate and move on, it isn’t. For example, managing up to 5 different routes per connection and you have 100 connections, it becomes more tricky to coordinate traffic without having starvation at one point.
Who tells us that ISP won’t restrict torrent traffic anyway??
get uTorrent Beta here http://tinyurl.com/h33t-uTorrent-Beta-search
Bring it on. All I can consume @ 20Mb/s. I’m gonna make tons of profit at the carboots and markets
i dont want utorrent to slow itself down, i want it to be pushing the limits
go ahead and make the switch to deluge client..
the brutal reality which nobody so far has spoken about is that if you have a standard cable or ADSL domestic connection of 10Mbps down 768Kbps up then to reach 8Mbps down using bittorrent you probably have to throttle your up bandwidth to 20% of maximum
uTP will do this for you. uTP is all about optimising the client. the benefits to ISPs are only of secondary significance
http://www.h33t.com sees that the same people who speak against TPB speak against anything bittorrent related
f you use uTorrent, get slow speeds, and think your ISP is throttling your bandwidth, try setting encryption to forced and bt.transp_disposition to 10.
club penguin toys
You can find a description of the uTP protocol here:
http://bittorrent.org/beps/bep_0029.html
It is a TCP-like protocol which runs on top of UDP. It uses a different method of congestion control than TCP, but still includes ACKs and Resets.
I haven’t enough experience analyzing TCP behavior to say what the implications are, but most people commenting about uTP on the internet haven’t bothered to read the protocol.
Great, I have been waiting for this for ever. This will reduce the traffic for trackers, allowing for more open trackers to pop up. Plus i will finally be able to use my VoIP without having to kill uTorrent in order to avoid lag or connection errors.
Well, I know for sure I’m not going to update to the v2.0. I won’t be supporting this venture.
I think this is a real bad thing…
C’mon! If the network is congested, that’s why the ISP is selling more bandwidth than they have! Why would I reduce my speed in favor of their mistakes?
I’m PAYING to have a certain speed, why wouldn’t I use?
There is another issue here… This will allow the ISPs to controll even more BitTorrent. They will limit your speed for torrent and uTP will take care of the rest. And then they’ll say: “Well, you know, that not our fault… It’s this protocol that’s f*cking your speed…”
I hope this solves the port-forwarding problem (someone here said it does). Networking is a different language to me, and once upon a time I did port-forwarding and opened up a bittorrent port and things were good — but I’m too lazy to do the complicated dance of figuring out how to do port forwarding on my new router. I seem to upload just fine, but my DHT face is always yellow and unhappy. If that makes sense.
UTP is slower for me.
I can get ~25MB/s upload and ~110MB/s download without UTP, however with UTP on 2.0 I max out at ~8MB/s upload (download isn’t affected)
UTP might have some use for crappy ISP’s but otherwise it might cause problems for people with decent connections.
uTP is not about slowing things down, its about making the highways run more smoothly – if everyone is trying to go too fast then the result is a giant traffic jam – so uTP is about speeding things up
@114:
I never said it was ABOUT slowing things down, I said in my situation it did.
“f everyone is trying to go too fast then the result is a giant traffic jam”
I don’t care about anyone else, I pay for 200mbps upload and 1gbps download, why would I want to reduce my upload capability to below 100mbps by using UTP (in my situation)
Dudes, you don’t pay for dedicated bandwidth. If you want to pay for dedicated bandwidth, prepare to pay A LOT MORE. It’s much more expensive.
It’s like paying for a car which has no high-speed, but being jammed in traffic. Your speed won’t do you any good.
If you say “But I paid for this car!”, tough luck. If you want traffic to not stop you, go pay for a private jet or a VIP position. I’m sure you’ll find it will be much too expensive.
@116
You are almost right. The problem is that ISPs infraestructure are REALLY TOTALLY no adequated for what they sell.
They make A LOT of money, spend a bit in low quality network and screw the users…
The thing is: they CAN’T offer more than what they can serve. That’s fraud. It’s like buying something you can’t pay, the difference is that ISPs have a lot of money so the laws don’t exactly apply on them… :/
We should NOT suppot this kind of abuse.
.. so they want us to limit ourselves? instead of investing into last mile fiber-optics and giving us 150 Mbit/s both ways, they sells us cheap story we have to limit ourselves meanwhile they got money collected and indulge themselves into *profits*? go fcuk yourselves, you need some anti-trust surgery and division into little companies without leverage on us…
uTorrent 3.0 will even be more ISP friendly and integrate an all new pay2download protocol where you have to pay your ISP a second time for the bandwith you have already bought.
Okay, I finished reading what is uTP. All UTP is a way for your client to scale your connection speed accordingly on your home network. This is done by optimising the frame in a packet that will help scale the BitTorrent software.
*Yawn*
While it is difficult to add a queue based system by looking into the network stack, this isn’t really an innovative approach.
All this does is measure your throughput traffic on your computer and prioritizes BitTorrent traffic on your home network to be less of a priority.
This isn’t innovative at all… It is more of an annoyance than anything.
I wish I understood a word of this. I LOVE BitTorrent but I haven’t used it for about a year because I don’t understand the likelihood of getting fined for downloading from there. I think I’ll look into finding a “torrents for dummys” book/blog/anything because I do not comprehend how some sites get in trouble for it, and some don’t. I just want to go back to my life where I could have all the music I wanted without the worry.
Regardless of whether or not this is good or bad for users, a couple of comments hit on the real issue. This should be back burner stuff. What users want, and want now, is anonymity and the ability to break ISP throttling methods.
Well, as soon as I posted that I effortlessly found what I was looking for thanks to Digg. It’s called the Big Book of BitTorrent
@7 You’re a fucking idiot, here’s some arguments against yours.
1. The protocol isn’t closed and even if it was, it’s still in development so how the fuck would you know anyway:
http://bittorrent.org/beps/bep_0029.html
2. ISPs can already slow and block whatever the fuck they want to block, that’s the whole reason for implementing a new protocol … so they don’t.
3. If an ISP wants to know what someone is downloading they already can. They just don’t give enough shit to care unless they get multiple complaints from copyright enforcement agencies. If you’re really worried about it, there is something called “Protocol Encryption”, but ISPs know how to throttle even that.
Incredible how people throw asinine assertions on how networks work LoL
FIRST networks depend on topology and not just equipment. Cables use round robin or bus topologies and those are very much prone to user usage. Optical networks are taking the star topology that can handle traffic better and don’t depend on your neighbours usage unless the router is overcome but not the line.
SECOND UDP is for traffic that don’t need any kind of assurance. It will not report delivery it will not report integrity and it will not report anything is like someone that doesn’t care to where he goes as long as is going as opposed to someone that needs to be at someplace.
THIRD ISP’s have congestion problems not because of bandwidth is because of the choices they made in topology and business on the business side the opt to over sell their networks because they assumed nobody would be using it for long periods of time like bittorrent does. Over subscription is even done it, in airlines and have the same problems when people arrive to take a seat, they are bumped to the next flight. It is even a point of sale in modern routers, don’t trust me go google for router oversubscription capabilities. Cable companies put thousands of households which have 2 or more computers using the internet and don’t expect congestion? How will they deal with VoIP, video streams and others things that keep the network busy for long periods of time? Today in the U.S. and some parts of Europe they can’t, they didn’t build those networks to be always on and that is what is hurting them, they thought it would be like telephone but it is not. The internet converge a big chunk of what people need and they are using more and more. Stop bitching about your neighbor is not his fault. ISP used the wrong topology and want give up oversubscription so they got into this mess themselves.
FOURTH this new bittorrent protocol is promising to much and I have real doubts that it could deliver and until it is tested to see how it was implemented and if it works nobody can really tell if it is good or bad and the moronic people defending one side or another are just stupid.
http://www.networkworld.com/details/679.html?def
Oversubscription primer LoL
For all you idiots.
Because the oversubscription economic model ISP will never voluntarely accept any traffic that keeps up for very long periods of time like VoIP, video streaming, video conference, bittorrent and others. It reduces their capacity to oversubscribe and thus reduce their profits you dumb people.
The entire idea here misses the point. P2P shifts costs from content providers to ISPs, multiplying them one hundredfold in the process. (Bandwidth at the edge of the network is 100x times more expensive than bandwidth at the core.) Thus, it is never a square deal and should never be acceptable to any ISP.
@126 Nov 01, 2009 at 22:15 by Brett Glass:
Only if you are not a Tier 1. Otherwise the cost of the traffic is irrelevant.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peering
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_Datagram_Protocol
Read about UDP and why it does need a congestion control system and could be potentially easy poisoned generating bottlenecks. TCP already have traffic control and scales back when it senses to much loss of packets. Although UDP is a nobrainer for P2P that don’t need to be reliable and can put the checking on the client side it will really depend on the implementation so no fireworks just yet.
A study on highway traffic proved that when cars drive slower, traffic moves faster. Hopefully this theory will prove itself to be universal : )
You miss the point with the whole topology and how bit torrent works. When a packet that is going to the same destination, the router will use the same route as before because it will use the entry it added to the ip address list. Otherwise the weight between each network router will not change.
Secondly UDP has error checking within the packet itself and you do not need to acknowledge a sent frame for BItTorrent because if the packet is bad, it will be discarded and will be received again (eventually).
If you want spywares, yes download Utorrent 2.0. Otherwise be smart and stay clear.
An attitude like that is at least a little bit silly. Notice, I don’t say “stupid”, merely silly. The customer who is aware of real life issues, and makes efficient use of the resources available will be more satisfied than he who lacks awareness. Yes, the ISP’s should adapt, but while we are waiting on them, let’s try to improve the way we use the intartubez.
by U U U U
ISPs need to adjust to the consumers – not other way round
===============
An attitude like that is at least a little bit silly. Notice, I don’t say “stupid”, merely silly. The customer who is aware of real life issues, and makes efficient use of the resources available will be more satisfied than he who lacks awareness. Yes, the ISP’s should adapt, but while we are waiting on them, let’s try to improve the way we use the intartubez.
Why do people think they are entitled to dedicated bandwidth without paying for it? Same reason that games, videos and movies are pirated I suppose.
@130 Nov 02, 2009 at 00:51 by Anonymous:
No the f****** protocol don’t have error correction go read about it and show us where is the stupid error correction inside the protocol.
@134 Nov 02, 2009 at 01:35 by Anonymous:
You stupid, stupid creature.
People are entitled to a level of service that was promised to them and not delivered and is in the realm of possibility otherwise how is that service is better in Asia than it is in Europe and the U.S.?
Do you think those little asian people are doing less torrenting? Are you stupid? Rethorical Question.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc768
UDP checksum and source port for IPv4 are optional and for IPv6 the checksum is a requirement.
I just tested this beta and was not expecting what I just got, lol.
I’m a Newsgroups fan but using this beta 2.0 I got download speed of over 2 mb/ps and let it find it’s own upload speed based on it’s own bandwidth speed test.
I’m liking this a lot if this is what it’s going to be like. :)
http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2009/10/widespread-availability-of-online-video-means-less-p2p-use.ars
Ars technica has it right, with 20% of user using up of 80% of the bandwidth one way to deal with it, is to expand. The other is cry wolf and say that users are responsible and they need to be dealt with.
Someone care to guess which approach has better results in Asia the leader in internet broadband today?
Hint, in most of Asia the roll out of 1Gigabit internet connections already started and is on par with the penetration of FiOS in the U.S. how the f*** they did that?
Note: Anyone trying to charge per byte will die in Asia. There is no monopoly on broadband there. And no exclusive contracts for regions either. As a curiosity did people know that the biggest internet exchanges are in europe and asia?
http://static.arstechnica.com/2009/10/15/high_price_low_speeds.png
The funny side of the story is that the ones complaining the most are the ones that offer the worst service in the world.
And more impressive they almost are all in the U.S. LoL
Maybe that is why they only bully canada because they can’t compete in any other market.
Sad state of Camadian Telcos… UTP is essential must… Forced encryption.. Although this lessens BT burden on ISPs..More then it already is.. This isn’t going to stop Bell\Rogers..
4 years ago Hong Kong was putting 1 Gb internet in homes and it cost $250 but today it cost a fraction of that.
http://www.tvover.net/2005/04/28/Hong+Kong+Offers+1+Gigabit+Residential+Internet+Access.aspx
Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, China and others too.
Hikari one(1 gigabit internet) in japan cost less then $40 dollars. F*** Me!
The cost of a dedicate line in Japan? $1000 dollars a month. How much does it cost in the U.S. again? $3000? $5000? or $10.000?
People really need to pay attention to Asia on the broadband frontier, they are kicking the rest of the world in development and could pretty much be the destination of choice for big data centers and hosting services, cloud computing and other stuff.
OK, a quick A/B comparisson between the 1.8.2 and 2.0.0 clients, TCP versus uTP, same well-seeded, fast torrent, alternating between each client, basic UT configuration, no downstream limit, tcp/udp ports open, no a/v, no firewall, quality nat router (dsl), non-shaping isp … anything else, ask.
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/6640/prtgcutall.png (yellow: downstream / blue: upstream)
It does what it says, it keeps the net running well for other tasks as average throughput for uTP ran about 2/3 the limit of downstream capacity than that of TCP which will happily use it all. Good for ISPs, good for non-BitTorrent net use, not so good for BitTorrent performance. At least this demonstration shows a marked drop in performance on a clean connection with no capacity issues.
It’ll be pros & cons, I guess, as far as whether it proves the best thing since sliced bread, or not.
no flippin way. So now I{ll not get the full upload speed i{m paying for… K, downloading the older version of Utorrent and stayin with it until we have complete freedom of what we want to do. This sounds like Utorrent is cowering away from legal trouble because they are saving the ISP work. We are paying the ISP, but we are not paying Utorrent. Speaking of which… I don{t think the industry has been smart enough or even thought about giving the client makers the lawsuits.
Theres still too many questions to be answered. Exactly how this works when throttling is active also from ISPs? Other than that it sounds fine, but consumer adaption this way should never become too popular. It only leads to less quality of services, because then there is no need to create any better.
Also keep things informed about this. Or you might be having topics like “Actions against piracy seem to be effective, look at statistics from ISPs”
No matter how much bandwidth you pay for, packet prioritization will always be necessary in order to maintain quality of service for everyone. This fact is inescapable. Either the ISP will do it (using DPI), your router will do it (Gamefuel anyone?), or your software will do it (hence uTP). If we don’t take at least some responsibility for how we use their networks, the choice will be made for us and this is exactly what we’re beginning to see.
And just because we pirates are being asked to be a little more responsible doesn’t mean ISP’s are automatically off the hook either. While there will always be a demand for greater bandwidth, there is also nothing wrong with trying to improve the efficiency of what we already have either.
What really amazes me is that if Bram had designed uTP as part of the original Bittorrent protocol to begin with like it should have been, we wouldn’t even be arguing about it today.
Oh, and regarding the test done by Data above, did anyone happen to notice that despite maxed out download bandwidth in 1.8.2, version 2.0 still managed to download the test file in approximately the same amount of time? Very interesting that.
It would seem to show evidence of what someone mentioned earlier regarding vehicular traffic tests. Driving faster does not always get you to your destination faster, something I’ve actually noticed many times driving here in Canada. The only way you might get ahead is to both speed very fast and run through every red light encountered, and even then you would still only beat me to our destination by a few seconds. Hardly worth the risk or the huge fine you would get if caught by the police. Same goes for highway driving. You can speed past me (I always drive at the limit), but I’ll only catch up to you at the first town or city you hit. That’s when I usually honk the horn and wave lol.
Well I DL’d it and am using it, it seems to work fine, installation was a snap…
I have been using Azureus for years and was using the latest version (with the Az UI of course, F the Vuze interface!) before I DL’d UT’s latest beta, last buld I used of Utorrent was 1.4.2, just to try it out, well I didnt like it..
2.0 however seems to work prettty good, speeds seem to be pretty much the same as I was getting with Az..
I I will switch to UT if I dont see any major issues witth this build.. I personally think that ISP’s are not our enemies, they take allot of heat from certain organizations and have to do what they can to “appease” them.. Cut them a break Ppl they arent the ones out to get you, if that were the case you would all have been “Gotten” a long time ago…
Sorry, but bandwidth tests comparing TCP and uTP aren’t very useful right now. First off, it’s still in beta. Secondly, you’re connections will be limited to only two clients, Mainline and uTorrent. Results from speed tests won’t be truly valid until uTP is finished and all clients support it, which they inevitably will (makes no sense not to).
???
Yes, very interesting… attitude there. What’s the matter, feeling defensive? Those are sections of a single 1.38GB movie download, http://www.legaltorrents.com/torrents/547-home-2009 (TorrentFreak automatically stripped the URL from the previous post), the gaps are nothing more than me manually halting transfer after an arbitrary time period to swap between clients (both clients worked the same identical files in the same download location, just not at the same time (stop download, exit client, open next client, force recheck, start download, monitor, stop download, exit client, open next client, force recheck, start download… get the picture?)).
What that test shows is uTorrent 2.0.0 uTP operates at around 2/3rds the rate of 1.8.2 TCP even where there isn’t even any congestion on the link.
So what you got for me now, another car analogy?
There were a number of differing versions of uTorrent/Mainline in the peerlist, of course, those that support uTP. TCP client connections were limited to 20 during some tests to balance the number of connections against the more limited uTP peers, with TCP peers being more abundant, obviously, due to non-uTP clients. uTP proved slower unanimously even when comparring the same remote clients pushing TCP one moment, then uTP the next. uTP ran slower. Period. If you think things will improve once there are higher number of uTP peers, think again. The evidence I present doesn’t support that conclusion.
has own page here: http://bittyrant.en.softonic.com although seems to be not updated in a while
If you’re not satisfied with your Torrent client and feel that you could squeeze some extra mileage out of your connection, then you should give BitTyrant a go.
BitTyrant uses a different type of torrent protocol that’s compatible with BitTorrent and is optimized for fast download performance. Now, the big selling point of this client is speed although this cannot be guaranteed depending on what type of connection you have, how many seeds a torrent has etc.
However, the developers claim that it’s up to three times quicker than Azureus and much fairer in the way it rewards uploaders rather than downloaders. In terms of interface however, there’s little difference – BitTyrant looks exactly like Azureus although there are a few optional features to display statistics relevant to BitTyrant’s operation. There is however an underlying difference between it and other clients. BitTyrant differs in its selection of which peers to unchoke and send rates to unchoked peers. In this way, it theoretically means that bandwidth speeds are used more efficiently and fairly although as I say, much will depend on your own connection and ISP provider.
Wait for the protocol to be open and emulate the damn thing in NS2 :)
http://nsnam.isi.edu/nsnam/index.php/Main_Page
Use some network monitoring tool like RRDTool or MRGT or CACTI. There are lots of them. So you can see your network working all day long.
There is even network management systems for people who want to manage their internet and those will do a good job too.(Zenoss, Zabex, nagios and others all free)
Bandwidth apps exist too like MasterShaper(linux) and Bandwidth Manager(win)
ps: bittorrent uses UDP already, block UDP and see if it can transfer anything.
if those who profit from others wish to win, we simply need to do We are the digits, and the digits are fact.
So many morons here, it would be like playing Wack-A-Mole to try and correct all of the misinformation.
Did it ever occur to any of you that if you don’t know what you are talking about, to stop talking about it?
I suggest some of you do less talking and more reading.
Bottom line.
When network congestion occurs, a high packet error rate happens. This is a problem, because the higher the congestion, the delay times increase exponentially. By throttling traffic before a high level of congestion, overall speeds will be HIGHER.
@2 “ISPs need to adjust to the consumers – not other way round”
Said like a true pirate.
And what happens when the movie industry gets the court to ban your ISP to stop traffic from UT?
This is a great idea for those who already have been warned by their ISP.
This actully seems like a good idea.
My ISP has gone down the throttling route where they just cut your upload and download speeds for a few hours if you go over the limit in the peak times.
With torrents going the dynamic upload limit (it goes down in increments) is hard to set up the upload limit in the client.
If this fixes that issue then great. Still think throttling on an unlimited connection is wrong.
“With uTP, uTorrent (and the Mainline client) will become network aware by throttling itself”
What if I don’t want to be throttled? If I notice longer loading times for web pages and it bothers me, I’ll slow down my torrents manually, thank you very much.
Those who do not understand TCP are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.
Reallies, tehy do it for teh lulz.
Find how get some extra money clicking ads in internet. You only need a Paypal account to easily earn up to $100 per month. I am doing it and it’s even fun. Press in thin link to find our how –> – http://www.svbux.com/?r=815459216
Be prepared to loose up to 33% – 50% of torrent speed when you constantly access the web. Because… the web is already bloated as it is – and be a lot more when HTML 5 is wide spread.
I’m an ISP and you get what we give you, if you don’t like it then find another network. It’s the number of connections that is the killer with P2P. At times there are 1000’s of connection into a single client, we just have to shut them down because it adversely effects all the other customers.
Have to agree with #154…
I would suggest quit speculating and use the F-ing thing and see for yourselves…
Does NOT slow your browser down when DLing and surfing at the same time..
And some other moron said it was full of spyware… Give us a break idiot..No Spyware…
I’ll find another p2p client then, or will be using the old one. I like fast bit-torrent, and don’t care about ISP’s problems. Anonymity is more important.
@ Reasoned Mind (44)
You wrote, “I’m indeed very happy with [...] massive hard drives to store my CDs so I can use my jukebox software to stream my legally purchased tracks around my 5 bedroomed house. I just don’t agree with stealing and not purchasing media to sate your appetite for illicit free media.”
UK copyright law prevents the transfer of data across media types (eg from CD/DVD to hard-drive), even for private use. You would, therefore, support those who consider this a step too far, and be willing to criticise the industry bodies who have pursued individuals who have done it?
Or do you believe that, whatever the law says in a given country, it is correct for that country and should be obeyed? If so, I assume you would support Spain’s current position on private use of copyright works?
Which is it? Cant keep your cake and eat it :)
http://www.digitalsociety.org/2009/11/analysis-of-bittorrent-utp-congestion-avoidance/
I tested uTorrent 2.0, and it is still not network friendly at all. My testing suggests that it’s just as nasty to web surfing, online gaming, and VoIP as before. BitTorrent still consumes 90% of the network and causes very high jitter.
@163 Nov 02, 2009 at 17:01 by It doesnt work that way:
That is the atitude!
I agree people not happy should be lobbying congress to let them play in the broadband field.
We need more people willing to build their own netowrks and choose some backbone to connect to.
For every fiber in the ground in Asia there is 20 or more ISPs trying to get to use that and it is not owned by them. When the ecosystems in the U.S. and the entire Europe is like that ISP’s will have to stop bitching about and start working hard to advance their services until then you get people who feel entitled to their profits without regard to their costumers.
I have no problems with my internet being congested even when getting great upload or download speeds. I pay for the fancy cable internet subscription; why would I try to use less of what I pay for unless I happen to have stock in my ISP? This is bullshit, and I will be sticking with uTorrent 1.8.x.
@“Sam
You can disable uTP by unticking ”Preferences > BitTorrent > Enable bandwidth management” if you want.
Isn’t self-throttling how David Carradine died? …what… too soon?
@Sam: It won’t affect you if your connection is not congested you dumbass
The TCP ‘problem’ isn’t what causes ISP’s to throttle.
ISP’s back-haul pipes have contention ratios due to the costs (BT’s ‘cash-cow’) and in order to manage bandwidth so that it is somewhat ‘usable’ and so they can keep using their ‘unlimited’ logos.
Virgin Media is a different story, their bandwidth problem is down to wiring, which is very expensive to replace and would require replacing most of the fibre cabling around the UK.
Some of the backhaul fibres cables are so old that the new ones they lay have 5 times more capacity.
@some guy
Actually it does, you dumbass.
ISP oversubscribes their lines.
fuck them
@172,174 and 176..
I have been using the newest alpha of UT for a couple days, the only prefs I changed was the encryption..
If anything I have seen an increase in performance…but really subtle, nothing to “pop” one over, LoL..
On files with very few seeds/leaches I gets speeds I would expect from other clients, on other more popular files I have reached DL speeds of 1.5 megs…
The client seems to find and connect to more seeds than I have noticed other clients connecting to, thats a PLUS…
Personally I like it, so far…
nigga please
utorrent is for n00bs!!!
use cheaters clients FTW!!!
feedthe.net pwned
In principle I like the idea of what BitTorrent is trying to do with uTP, as it has the potential to address the key “pain point” that ISPs have with P2P (P2P always causes congestion somewhere in the network, by design, and uTP proposes a mechanism for backing off so that links aren’t quit congested, which is better for both ISPs and users). If BitTorrent can do this work in the context of open standards (i.e. the IETF), so that all P2P companies can collaborate on the protocol, then I am a huge fan.
In the UK. BT 21cn is going to have better QoS traffic management on their network so this will be done on the ISP side of things in the future anyway.
I have been using utorrent 2.0 for a few days now…I can confidently say it reduces download speeds significantly…I haven’t noticed ANY cap on the upload. From a personal point of view…this sux :(
Instead of trying to redevelop TCP/IP (BTW, how many programmers will try to create this new protocol and for how many years until it will become stable…), more simple solutions would help ISPs with VERY HUGE IMPACT and HUGE reduction of costs, including increase in speeds for everyone.
I work in ISP and the biggest problem (and the reason) why P2P traffic is throttled, is the network abuse from the P2P programs side. If you are in Sweden and calling your neigbour you can expect low rate for the call. If you call Argentina, price is high, because traffic must pass Atlantic and many borders. Each byte that crossed Atlantic is many times more costly than the byte that is delivered to neighbour. Costly for you, users, because YOU pay for that cost, not anyone else. Megabit of traffic costs thousands in long distance and for some special destinations, and cost nearly zero in short distance or some other destinations. Both eMule and torrent clients are STUPID enough to do not care about that at all, happily downloading a 4MB torrent file piece from Argentina even when the source is available nearby.
Whats needed is the priority based on IP ranges. So, if many sources are available, client must connect from first priority IP ranges, then from second priority IP ranges, and so on. Its so simple to implement, compared to uTP. And the IP list file with priorities for every IP range, very similar format of IPFILTER.DAT in emule, will be prepared by ISP. The client can get the file by connecting to, for example _ip_priorities.reversednsname.provicer.com. I will post this to utorrent forum and see what happens. If they implement this, I will advice all millions of clients to use uTorrent only, on every invoice, for example. As an ISP I want to deliver the maximum possible speed for the interconnect budget I have, and IP priorities would allow to eliminate all throttling. Its the most popular files that kill the networks, not the rear files. And most popular files are usually offered locally, just the programs are stupid enough and connect to South America to get piece that is available nearby.
I have tried this Utorrent 2.0 out.
Just to let you know it throttles more than my isp. You can keep it thank you very kindly.
1.6.1 Stable FTW!!!!11
74 references to this post
Responses are closed
All remaining responses will continue to be archived. Use the TorrentFreak forums if you want to discuss something.