Using Vuze, last night I was getting 250k+ downloads(!).

Today I'm struggling with 60k with a well seeded file (13th warrior)

I've switched ports but no diffence. The port I am using seems to respond to cutting back my uploads giving me a total transfer rate hovering around 100k. The less I share the better the download.

What's the trick? I'm using UDP and not DHT, not set a static IP.


ISP is TalkTalk, I see they're on the P2P blacklist...

Screwd.

Originally Posted by Screwdriver

....... The less I share the better the download.
......

Is the crux of the thing.......

You've a 2/4/8MB? But it's only ~300kb upload The more you share(upload), the more you 'limit' the amount you can download, 'cos of the way it all works. Check with an online 'net speed checker - Speedtest.net - The Global Broadband Speed Test or something.

There's an option somewhere in Vuse (I haven't used it in ages and don't anymore so can't remember exactly where it is) to limit the max upload speed. I found on a 2MB line, with a 256k upload speed that about 20kb upload was about right - anymore and downloads suffered. YMMV

I have an 8Mb service and about 850kb upload. I am familiar with the upload/download settings and was (once) able to manipulate them to get 250kb downloads (iirc with 85kb upload). But suddenly, I get fuck all download. Pretty sure it's my ISP buggering about, am going to try port 10000 as suggested, once all my Usenet movies have finished downloading!

There is also a setting for sharing only to peers with relatively high upload speeds, multiple file shares and a decent share ratio, so limiting the upload speeds can actually be disastrous for your downloads. There is a fine balance which I am sure I've got the hang of but after grabbing a handful of HD films, suddenly it's like my P2P is switched off.

Screwd.

In my limited experience with TalkTalk, they're fine with a properly configured P2P client. Try at off peak hours to see if they're throttling you. Try a Linux Ubuntu download to see if it's the torrent, it's open source and should max you out.

You neglected to mention your OS. Assuming XP, there's a limit on the number of connections; one might assume that limiting your outgoing conns might increase your limit on incoming, thereby improving download speeds. There's a tweak, google it.

It might also be that your PC just isn't up to uploading & downloading & surfing at the same time. Perhaps nobody wanted your 250k file, while everyone who connected to you wanted some of your <movie>.*

Is there a reason you're using UDP? You could try the more common TCP, it might limit problems due to dropped packets(?). Setting a static local IP is probably worth doing also, especially if you have other machines on your network.

Port 10000 is just a randomly selected unused port which your ISP probably isn't blocking, as opposed to whichever port Vuze uses by default. If you've tried changing ports already, it probably won't help.

Those net-based speed tests are a waste of time, IMHO, measuring as they do the connection between yourself and their server, rather than yourself and the internet as a whole. Better to install some monitoring software on your PC, or use a software firewall which tells you actual speed (e.g. Sygate).

Perhaps you've recently switched ISP or installed a new router? Could be that your router is problematic with your connection (e.g. ADSL router on an ADSL 2+ network), or that it's just learning your connection and will be fine in a day or so.

* Bad idea asking for help stealing copyrighted material btw, you're asking for a thread-pulling and I'm only replying cos I'm bored. Do yourself a favour, install PeerBlock if you haven't already.

Snow Leopard on a quad core Mac Pro desktop. Neat idea about Ubuntu. I'm leaning away from setting up a static IP in light of recent prosecutions but will have a look at Peerblock and see if there's a Mac OS X equivalent.
Thanks
Screwd.

Originally Posted by Screwdriver

I'm leaning away from setting up a static IP in light of recent prosecutions

That won't make any difference in your case. The only IP address the internet can see is that of your router, and your ISP can trace that to you in the event of a prosecution whether it's static or dynamic. Lots of authorities run clients on torrents which harvest a list of all IP addresses which connect to them, then use that to prosecute - which is where the likes of PeerBlock come in.

I was talking about setting up static IPs on your internal network. Presumably you're using UPnP to dynamically open ports in your router, which is considered by some to be a 'security' risk in that any software on your PC can initiate a conversation with the internet without your express permission.

With static IPs you can manually assign ports to applications and route that traffic to a specific machine on your network. If you just manually open a port but use DHCP to dynamically assign IP addresses it's possible for your router to get confused as to where to send the traffic if you were to boot your machines in a different sequence. Computers like explicit rules, I'll not patronise you by making up some weak analogy to bus lanes