Unhappy with your ISP?

Folks,

I've only just found this group. I have had horrendous problems with my ISP,
including false advertising ("unlimited" service my a***!).

I have approached Otelo (http://www.otelo.org.uk), and the matter looks like
it has legs; I could get the contract declared void and compensation!

(I presume those people with bandwidth issues have visited this page? :-
http://www.adslguide.org.uk/tools/speedtest.asp )

Cheers,

Me.

> (I presume those people with bandwidth issues have visited this page? :-

I'm starting to get a little cheesed off with Pipex now, as they appear
to be throttling all torrent sites to ~21k/sec max.

Perhaps it might be worth starting a new thread every quarter (or even
per month) where we could report our speeds to give other users an idea
what is being throttled back.

On 28-Sep-2006, Colin Wilson <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I'm starting to get a little cheesed off with Pipex now, as they appear
> to be throttling all torrent sites to ~21k/sec max.

Because they haven't bought in enough bandwidth.
Torrents are the easiest to throttle, streaming audio/video
quickly reveals throttling, and users get shirty when they
notice the degredation of service. As do the gamers.
The ISP assumes that most P2P is illegal and as the
users are locked in by the terms of their contract, hit
them.

> > I'm starting to get a little cheesed off with Pipex now, as they appear
> > to be throttling all torrent sites to ~21k/sec max.
> Torrents are the easiest to throttle

Has anyone found a way around throttling ? - i'm on a non-standard port,
but encryption of the packets seems to make no difference.

I'm trying to figure out what filtering method they might be using, as
the data packets themselves wouldn't reveal anything obvious afaik
(apart from a source and destination port) - i.e. you can download data
from alternate sources via http without throttling, a torrent simply
uses a different port to do the same.

Does anyone know if all "non-standard" ports are throttled by default ?
(i'm thinking a by-the-packet filtering system would have to be pretty
damn powerful to throttle the entire ISPs' throughput)

All this for sodding *nix distribs :-}

On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 00:35:51 +0100, Colin Wilson <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Has anyone found a way around throttling ? - i'm on a non-standard port,
>but encryption of the packets seems to make no difference.
>
>I'm trying to figure out what filtering method they might be using, as
>the data packets themselves wouldn't reveal anything obvious afaik
>(apart from a source and destination port) - i.e. you can download data
>from alternate sources via http without throttling, a torrent simply
>uses a different port to do the same.
>
>Does anyone know if all "non-standard" ports are throttled by default ?
>(i'm thinking a by-the-packet filtering system would have to be pretty
>damn powerful to throttle the entire ISPs' throughput)
>
>All this for sodding *nix distribs :-}

It won't be port blocking - virtually all of the bigger ISPs have the
kit to do deep packet inspection on ALL data transiting their network.
Encrypted torrents are still identifiable as torrent traffic even if
the content of the torrent remains unknown. Pusnet for one has been
(mis)using Ellacoyas for years
--
John Naismith

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:R4WdnTt-(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> On 28-Sep-2006, Colin Wilson <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> I'm starting to get a little cheesed off with Pipex now, as they appear
>> to be throttling all torrent sites to ~21k/sec max.
>
> Because they haven't bought in enough bandwidth.
> Torrents are the easiest to throttle, streaming audio/video
> quickly reveals throttling, and users get shirty when they
> notice the degredation of service. As do the gamers.
> The ISP assumes that most P2P is illegal and as the
> users are locked in by the terms of their contract, hit
> them.

However, if your contract states that you are paying £x amount for y
bandwidth and you aren't in breach of any caps/FUP, then you could argue
that the ISP is in breach of its contract with you. You could also say that
their contract breaches the Unfair Terms Act

Colin Wilson <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed) t:

>> > I'm starting to get a little cheesed off with Pipex now, as they
>> > appear to be throttling all torrent sites to ~21k/sec max.
>> Torrents are the easiest to throttle
>
> Has anyone found a way around throttling ? - i'm on a non-standard
> port, but encryption of the packets seems to make no difference.
>
I'm on PIPEX - I've found encryption to be very effective, with torrents
going up from 20kbs to well over 100kbs once its turned on.

Have you tried µtorrent?

On 29 Sep 2006, John Naismith wrote:

> has been (mis)using Ellacoyas for years

care to quote the start date then?

On 29 Sep 2006 "Rõbstër" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Have you tried µtorrent?

I don't remember seeing any mention of encryption (I didn't check for it
too hard, must admit, but it has been working well for me on Eclipse, with
good speeds on most things I transfer {VMware and collections of PDFs,
running to 10 GB in the last week or two, I think}). I like the scheduler
so have no traffic from 1700 to 0100 and lower than standard speeds
from 0900 to 1700 to ensure others get a fair response from the net.

--
Change to DSL Max the way I did: switch ISP <http://www.dslmax.info/>

NoNeedToKnow <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> On 29 Sep 2006 "Rõbstër" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>Have you tried µtorrent?
>
> I don't remember seeing any mention of encryption

µtorrent 1.6

Options>Preferences>BitTorrent>Protocol Encryption.

Outgoing - set enabled.