Sentech has port prioritization

[guest2013-1]

Or however that is spelt

On mIRC and Torrents (even eMule and eDonkey) I NEVER get more than 11kb/s download, yet, sites/ftp I get like 72-78kb/s sometimes

Anyone have an answer

OTHER than "this shouldn't be discussed here"

 

[silversurfer]

11kb/s TOTAL download speed, spread among a few torrents ?

or a single torrents maxing at 11kb/s ?

 

[guest2013-1]

1 torrent 11kbps
1 mirc file 11kbps

not at the same time

if i start downloading something, those speeds drop like a stone

 

[silversurfer]

dewd... is this new or has it always been like this? uve had this service for a while now, it cant be the first time ur trying to dl a torrent or leech of a fserve ?

plz as a test grab the latest shareza client : www.shareaza.com queue a couple of torrents in there, and queue a couple of other files through the edonky networks aswell as gnutella. shareaza is a good test for p2p, cos it connects to so many p2p networks.

spyware free, so dont worry bout installing it.

lemmi know how things go.

 

[pmik]

You are comparing apples with oranges. IRC (if you were DCC'ing), torrents, emule, edonkey, etc are peer-to-peer and therefore impacted by the peer's upstream bandwidth. FTPing off a hosted server is generally much faster as is not limited as much as a peer would be.. (or was the ftp server also a home user or something?)

Besides, Sentech have already stated that they are not doing any port prioritisation or traffic shaping (yet).

 

[Rhino]

I was getting 17kb/s yesterday on kazaa....[]

 

[gripen]

Cant somebody else with 256k+ verify this? It would be a serious downer if it were true..

There are a lot of things (other factors) that could be slowing it down.

 

[guest2013-1]

nope, this has been like this for all of my time with sentech (almost a month now)

and most of the fserves are 10mb links

so speed is not the problem from the server's side, and the only reason i'm posting now, is because some idiot has his min cap set at 9.5 and drops me each time it goes below (which is alot because its never faster than 11, although he has a max bandwidth of 231kb/s and I'm the only dude thats downloading from him)

 

[Ditch]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by pmik</i>
Besides, Sentech have already stated that they are not doing any port prioritisation or traffic shaping (yet).
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Well, if (when?) enough people start using p2p and other filesharing apps heavily (e.g. downloading movies etc), it's likely to pretty much ruin the service for other MyWireless users, so I don't think it would be unreasonable for Sentech to implement traffic shaping for these protocols later on. It's shared BW, there isn't all that much international BW to go around, yet it seems inevitable that some people will 'abuse' the service and just download all the time.

 

[lewstherin]

The merits/demerits of port shaping are not the issue here Ditch - if Sentech is implementing port shaping then they are lying to their customers about what they offer, since they clearly market their service as port prioritisation free.
However we must give them the benefit of the doubt at this point and request investigations into noone's problem.

Is this problem occurring with other MyWireless users?
Are we sure the application being used does not limit download bandwidth according to upload bandwidth (I think a few p2p apps do that)?
Has Sentech been officially consulted?
Why not test the p2p between 2 MyWireless users?

Until these questions are answered, we cannot rightfully assume anything about the MyWireless service.

<font color="blue">Telkom needs a leash, ICASA needs some guts, and the </font id="blue"><font color="red">SA consumer</font id="red"><font color="blue"> needs to make it happen</font id="blue">

 

[Ditch]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">if Sentech is implementing port shaping then they are lying to their customers about what they offer<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

That's not true, Sentech states VERY clearly in their FAQ that they retain the right to implement traffic shaping etc as they see fit:

"Are there any restrictions o­n applications, ports, etc. when using my MyWireless service?

Sentech does not restrict usage o­n the MyWireless platform in any way by default. However Sentech retains the right to implement restrictions in order to maintain quality of service across the network."

 

[flashvc]

Let's not jump to conclusions.
I have a 256k MyWireless and gets 30KB/s downloads easily from torrent.
All depends on how many seeds the torrent's got and whether you have the torrent incoming ports open.

DCC, if I remember correctly there's a setting in mirc to speed up DCCs (no idea what it's called, since I don't use mirc)

--

 

[Karnaugh]

I think I'm unlikely to answer this with comments like <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">OTHER than "this shouldn't be discussed here"<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> sarcasticly appended. Grow up.

Try using a propper TCP service to measure through-put rather than making claims like "Sentech has port prioritization"

<hr noshade size="1">
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."

NetLink Research

 

[Riaan Burger]

I have a 256 and use emule. Even with a rather bad signal of 2% - 18% or so (mostly lower), I regularly get 20+ k downloads in emule and still browse around the 'Net with ease. Haven't touched 30k yet, but I'm happy.

DarkLight Nocturnal Entertainment