ATT DSL Blocking Torrents?

[Blackadder III]

Hi,

If I am using a torrent downloading program like Bitlord and I set up
my router to forward the ports like the programs tell me, I completely
lose my internet connection after about 15 min or so.

If I do not forward ports, it runs fine, although not very fast.

Anyone having torrent problems with ATT DSL? Is there someting with
the fact that the port(s) are forwarded?

Thanks

[Robert Redelmeier]

Blackadder III <timburns99@sbcglobal.net> wrote in part:
> If I am using a torrent downloading program like Bitlord and I
> set up my router to forward the ports like the programs tell me,
> I completely lose my internet connection after about 15 min or so.

> If I do not forward ports, it runs fine, although not very fast.

> Anyone having torrent problems with ATT DSL? Is there someting
> with the fact that the port(s) are forwarded?


I suspect with the port fwding, you are being hammered by
too many requests.

On any TCP link, it is extremely important that the upload
not get fully saturated because ACKs may not get through,
slowing the download. (TCP capture effect).

This can easily happen with p2p filesharing software, and
the solution is to throttle them. Competent writers of p2p
software are well aware of this and have settings to avoid
using too much of the limited upstream bandwidth. If they
don't, they should not be used.


-- Robert

[Blackadder III]

On Apr 11, 8:28*am, Robert Redelmeier <red...@ev1.net.invalid> wrote:
> Blackadder III <timburn...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in part:
>
> > If I am using a torrent downloading program like Bitlord and I
> > set up my router to forward the ports like the programs tell me,
> > I completely lose my internet connection after about 15 min or so.
> > If I do not forward ports, it runs fine, although not very fast.
> > Anyone having torrent problems with ATT DSL? Is there someting
> > with the fact that the port(s) are forwarded?
>
> I suspect with the port fwding, you are being hammered by
> too many requests. *
>
> On any TCP link, it is extremely important that the upload
> not get fully saturated because ACKs may not get through,
> slowing the download. (TCP capture effect).
>
> This can easily happen with p2p filesharing software, and
> the solution is to throttle them. *Competent writers of p2p
> software are well aware of this and have settings to avoid
> using too much of the limited upstream bandwidth. *If they
> don't, they should not be used.
>
> -- Robert

Is this just a matter of limiting total uploading allowances (like
20kbs or so) or is it related to something else?

[Robert Redelmeier]

Blackadder III <timburns99@sbcglobal.net> wrote in part:
> On Apr 11, 8:28*am, Robert Redelmeier <red...@ev1.net.invalid> wrote:
>> This can easily happen with p2p filesharing software, and
>> the solution is to throttle them. *Competent writers of p2p
>> software are well aware of this and have settings to avoid
>> using too much of the limited upstream bandwidth. *If they
>> don't, they should not be used.
>>
>
> Is this just a matter of limiting total uploading allowances
> (like 20kbs or so) or is it related to something else?

No, that should do it. You don't need to throttle too hard
(unless there are multiple stations), but there is a world
of difference between 90% and 100% loaded. 90% lets ACKs
get through, 100% means they get delayed/dropped. So if you
have 256kb upload, then you're fine to use 200 or even 230.

If that doesn't work, you have some other trouble.
Perhaps a virus on your machine.

-- Robert