The provider cuts p2p, what to do with it?
Hi habr!
Moscow ISP for a year already
closes the top five largest providers of Moscow (according to AC & M-Consulting estimates , it owns about 6% of the Moscow broadband access market),
kills outgoing - upload traffic via p2p protocol.
I, as a subscriber, whose rating on external torrent trackers kept falling and falling, since I couldn’t replenish what I downloaded, I experienced all possible ways to circumvent this limitation. What came of it
The essence of the slaughter:
Until the end of July:
From the end of July:
')
Official position of the company:
According to unverified data from some sources: in the near future, the company does not plan to cancel prioritizing p2p traffic.
The easiest way: Connect yourself to another provider or a second line. And forget about the p2p cutter like a bad dream.
But such an output does not attract me, since I am satisfied with QWERTY and I see no reason to connect a second line to myself.
Well, now I turn to the most interesting.
I read about free VPN tunneling here, on the habr. In the topic everything is written, from myself I will add only a link to the settings (for Windows), VPN from itshidden service.
Measurements were performed on a stable version of µTorrent 1.8.4, other downloads were disabled.
First, let's take a look at the usual download and upload speeds on the QWERTY network:
So, I have VPN tunneling , let's look at the speed of download and upload:
Total:
The speed of return with VPN really increases, but the download speed drops dramatically, so it’s best to turn on VPN only for return after downloading the right content.
They wrote about him on Habré in release 2 of version, the default protocol will be included µTP.
Fortunately, QWERTY equipment currently cannot kill the µTP protocol. But there is another problem:
In beta versions, download does not work properly, for example, on my client, on version 1.8.4, the client downloads at a speed of 800-1000 Kb / s.
In the beta version, the download speed does not exceed 400-500 Kb / s. At the same time, with ÎĽTP turned on, the return is wavy, moves in steps, but reaches 500-600 Kb / s. Games with the bt.transp_disposition parameter have not yet given results.
I hope that in the release version 2.0 this jamb will be corrected, and the equipment of the provider will not be able to kill the ÎĽTP protocol. It should be noted that during the mass migration of subscribers to version 2, the shaper will not be felt that way, and overloading of channels is possible.
Total:
A very promising release, then the killing will almost not be felt.
You can use it, but you will have to accept the low download speed, although I still hope that this problem will be fixed in the release version.
There is a way out of any situation, there would be a desire.
Cutter p2p QWERTY can be bypassed!
At the moment, I prefer to use VPN tunneling. It is turned on and off with one click of the mouse, which is convenient.
If technically QWERTY does not find a way out to kill µTP, and the release version of µTorrent 2.0 will be released without the current jambs, then I will give up VPN.
It will be interesting. Interesting because:
First, the answer is interesting QWERTY, what measures the provider will take. I hope I will highlight the QWERTY response to us, the torrent.
Secondly, it is possible that µTP will allow to bypass the shapers not only with QWERTY, but also with other foreign providers. And then p2p is waiting for the dawn. :)
I would like to devote the next part of this topic to my thoughts and thoughts of my friend on the topic of a local torrent tracker.
It's no secret that QWERTY has its own local torrent tracker . At the moment, there are 15,000 registered users and over 35,000 torrents created. These are news, movies and other content. Of course, it is far from torrents.ru, but for a local network the tracker is quite large.
My friend and cheget thought and formulated several pros and cons of the local tracker.
It is worth noting that:
On the local tracker, there are no restrictions on impact.
Introduction:
It's no secret that p2p networks currently occupy the lion's share of all network traffic. And in modern conditions almost every first user who uses the services of the provider to provide access to the world wide web, almost every day something downloads or downloads via the p2p network (via torrent trackers using torrent clients).
The network structure of any provider in Moscow is a local network that combines all the end users of the provider, and therefore the output of the entire network to the Internet. The provider provides for the use of the internal network and Internet access at two different speeds, naturally inside the network speed is much higher than the speed of external traffic (Internet). Therefore, it is logical to make the popular p2p service on the inside network speed, but with access to it only by the users of the provider's network, with access blocked by external peers. This is a big plus, since downloading at a speed of 11 megabits (inside the network) and at a speed of 1 megabits (external download speed on the Internet) at the same tariff is a huge difference.
Pros:
So the main advantage of local trackers is naturally speed.
The second is the constant availability of peers (siders) on the inside network speed. Due to the popularity inside the network tracker - there is always a person inside the network who can download content by distribution. The second plus is a fast, one hundred percent high-speed jump. Inside the network there is always a certain number of siders, including unpopular distributions. As an example, even on distributions, which are a year or more, there is always one, two or three seeders on the Querti tracker that you can download everything from the same network speed, that is, very quickly (the speed is almost independent of the number of seeders depends on the restrictions that these siders set themselves, and since there is always one or two people on any hand, it is likely that at least one of them will distribute at the maximum speed). Well, the third is natural - as a rule, good support for the company (provider) of the tracker. Here and the possibility of placing on reliable servers of the company, support by the company of the prospects for the development of the tracker, protection of the interests of the tracker by the company.
Another plus is the good prospects and the possibility of rating growth due to the very high speed of jumps and returns (when traffic is reduced, the value of this plus drops significantly). Well, the last thing is the various network bonuses inside that allow you to control your personal rating very well. As an example, a sit-down bonus, when even simply when the client is turned on and with low returns, the rating, although slowly, is still growing.
Minuses:
First and foremost, it’s not possible to log in and download something, being outside the range of the provider’s ip address (for example, from work, or from another place of residence, or from a computer connected to the network via another provider).
The second is the direct dependence of the quality of the tracker, availability, on the technical condition of the internal network, as well as the tracker location server. That is, with some kind of more or less serious accident at the provider, the tracker may be unavailable for some time, as well as those peers that fall under the range of the accident.
The third and perhaps the most serious thing that directly concerns the main topic of the article is the reduction of traffic by the provider. Incoming traffic remains unchanged, and outgoing traffic is significantly lower. Another disadvantage is that the number of uploaders and peers is much lower than on the external network tracker. Hence, the amount of content of different types is usually much less. However, this minus loses its significance if the tracker is considered to be the official tracker of the provider, inside the network (if it’s just a local private tracker, then this minus is relevant).
Total:
In the absence of p2p traffic cuts by the company, local trackers remain the most popular, convenient and high-speed, and external trackers that are not tied to the internal network of the provider are significantly inferior to the internal ones according to these criteria. This is mainly due to the speed of course.
However, with a serious reduction in traffic, the importance of this falls sharply. Recently, the popularity has received such a phenomenon as retracker. However, in all respects and speeds, this phenomenon is significantly inferior to the inside network trackers, especially the official trackers of the provider. Hence, the search for ways to combat traffic cuts has a key role in supporting popularity within network trackers. Since practice and time shows that the main criticism of local trackers in favor of more extensive external trackers is built precisely on the reduction of traffic by the provider.
Epilogue:
So, in my topic I came to the main conclusion - under the conditions of hard killing of p2p traffic, the best option is to use local trackers within the provider's network. Since at very high speeds, the reduction is not noticeably so much, as well as with bonuses that allow you to correctly control your rating on the tracker. Unfortunately, the intranet trackers are quite a few good and rather large, which is why I wrote my own investigation, so to speak, in order to find convenient ways to bypass the shaper for external network trackers.
I hope my humble first topic is useful to someone and will be useful.
Thanks for reading :)
UPD: I would like to transfer this entry to the Peer-to-Peer thematic blog, but alas, there is not enough karma.
UPD: 2 Thank you transferred. :)
Moscow ISP for a year already
closes the top five largest providers of Moscow (according to AC & M-Consulting estimates , it owns about 6% of the Moscow broadband access market),kills outgoing - upload traffic via p2p protocol.
I, as a subscriber, whose rating on external torrent trackers kept falling and falling, since I couldn’t replenish what I downloaded, I experienced all possible ways to circumvent this limitation. What came of it
What? There is? Where?
The essence of the slaughter:
Until the end of July:
- Full return on the tariff plan occurs only at night, from 3 to 9 am;
- From 9 in the morning, the recoil is cut at a fixed level, gradually decreasing from about 300 KB / s at 9 am to 100 KB / s in the evening.
- In the evening rush hour, from 8:00 pm (on weekends from 6:00 pm), the distribution is fixed altogether at the level of ~ 50 kB / s, this continues until one o'clock in the morning;
- From 1 to 3 at night, the bar rises back to the level of 100–300 KB / s, but the shaper is removed only at 3 o'clock.
From the end of July:
topic on torrents.ru
- p2p returns around the clock does not exceed 150–200 KB / s
')
Official position of the company:
In connection with the active development of QWERTY and the growing needs of subscribers in the use of home Internet services, the loading of trunk channels has recently been observed, which can lead to a deterioration in the quality of services provided to all network users. It was revealed that the main load on the channels is exerted by outgoing p2p traffic , the growth of which significantly affects the overall comfortable time spent on the Internet.topic on the forum QWERTY
Since the main task for us is to support and improve the quality of the services provided to all our subscribers, we prioritize network traffic during peak hours. At the same time, the speed of access to the Internet and to the local network for all subscribers will remain unchanged. We hope for your understanding of the situation. Our engineers and employees of the company are considering other solutions.
According to unverified data from some sources: in the near future, the company does not plan to cancel prioritizing p2p traffic.
Ways to solve the problem:
The easiest way: Connect yourself to another provider or a second line. And forget about the p2p cutter like a bad dream.
But such an output does not attract me, since I am satisfied with QWERTY and I see no reason to connect a second line to myself.
Well, now I turn to the most interesting.
VPN uplift
I read about free VPN tunneling here, on the habr. In the topic everything is written, from myself I will add only a link to the settings (for Windows), VPN from itshidden service.
Measurements were performed on a stable version of µTorrent 1.8.4, other downloads were disabled.
First, let's take a look at the usual download and upload speeds on the QWERTY network:
So, I have VPN tunneling , let's look at the speed of download and upload:
Total:
The speed of return with VPN really increases, but the download speed drops dramatically, so it’s best to turn on VPN only for return after downloading the right content.
µTorrent 2.0 beta with included µTP
They wrote about him on Habré in release 2 of version, the default protocol will be included µTP.
Fortunately, QWERTY equipment currently cannot kill the µTP protocol. But there is another problem:
In beta versions, download does not work properly, for example, on my client, on version 1.8.4, the client downloads at a speed of 800-1000 Kb / s.
In the beta version, the download speed does not exceed 400-500 Kb / s. At the same time, with ÎĽTP turned on, the return is wavy, moves in steps, but reaches 500-600 Kb / s. Games with the bt.transp_disposition parameter have not yet given results.
I hope that in the release version 2.0 this jamb will be corrected, and the equipment of the provider will not be able to kill the ÎĽTP protocol. It should be noted that during the mass migration of subscribers to version 2, the shaper will not be felt that way, and overloading of channels is possible.
Total:
A very promising release, then the killing will almost not be felt.
You can use it, but you will have to accept the low download speed, although I still hope that this problem will be fixed in the release version.
General conclusions
There is a way out of any situation, there would be a desire.
Cutter p2p QWERTY can be bypassed!
At the moment, I prefer to use VPN tunneling. It is turned on and off with one click of the mouse, which is convenient.
If technically QWERTY does not find a way out to kill µTP, and the release version of µTorrent 2.0 will be released without the current jambs, then I will give up VPN.
It will be interesting. Interesting because:
First, the answer is interesting QWERTY, what measures the provider will take. I hope I will highlight the QWERTY response to us, the torrent.
Secondly, it is possible that µTP will allow to bypass the shapers not only with QWERTY, but also with other foreign providers. And then p2p is waiting for the dawn. :)
Why do Internet trackers, when there is a local ?
I would like to devote the next part of this topic to my thoughts and thoughts of my friend on the topic of a local torrent tracker.
It's no secret that QWERTY has its own local torrent tracker . At the moment, there are 15,000 registered users and over 35,000 torrents created. These are news, movies and other content. Of course, it is far from torrents.ru, but for a local network the tracker is quite large.
My friend and cheget thought and formulated several pros and cons of the local tracker.
It is worth noting that:
On the local tracker, there are no restrictions on impact.
Introduction:
It's no secret that p2p networks currently occupy the lion's share of all network traffic. And in modern conditions almost every first user who uses the services of the provider to provide access to the world wide web, almost every day something downloads or downloads via the p2p network (via torrent trackers using torrent clients).
The network structure of any provider in Moscow is a local network that combines all the end users of the provider, and therefore the output of the entire network to the Internet. The provider provides for the use of the internal network and Internet access at two different speeds, naturally inside the network speed is much higher than the speed of external traffic (Internet). Therefore, it is logical to make the popular p2p service on the inside network speed, but with access to it only by the users of the provider's network, with access blocked by external peers. This is a big plus, since downloading at a speed of 11 megabits (inside the network) and at a speed of 1 megabits (external download speed on the Internet) at the same tariff is a huge difference.
Pros:
So the main advantage of local trackers is naturally speed.
The second is the constant availability of peers (siders) on the inside network speed. Due to the popularity inside the network tracker - there is always a person inside the network who can download content by distribution. The second plus is a fast, one hundred percent high-speed jump. Inside the network there is always a certain number of siders, including unpopular distributions. As an example, even on distributions, which are a year or more, there is always one, two or three seeders on the Querti tracker that you can download everything from the same network speed, that is, very quickly (the speed is almost independent of the number of seeders depends on the restrictions that these siders set themselves, and since there is always one or two people on any hand, it is likely that at least one of them will distribute at the maximum speed). Well, the third is natural - as a rule, good support for the company (provider) of the tracker. Here and the possibility of placing on reliable servers of the company, support by the company of the prospects for the development of the tracker, protection of the interests of the tracker by the company.
Another plus is the good prospects and the possibility of rating growth due to the very high speed of jumps and returns (when traffic is reduced, the value of this plus drops significantly). Well, the last thing is the various network bonuses inside that allow you to control your personal rating very well. As an example, a sit-down bonus, when even simply when the client is turned on and with low returns, the rating, although slowly, is still growing.
Minuses:
First and foremost, it’s not possible to log in and download something, being outside the range of the provider’s ip address (for example, from work, or from another place of residence, or from a computer connected to the network via another provider).
The second is the direct dependence of the quality of the tracker, availability, on the technical condition of the internal network, as well as the tracker location server. That is, with some kind of more or less serious accident at the provider, the tracker may be unavailable for some time, as well as those peers that fall under the range of the accident.
The third and perhaps the most serious thing that directly concerns the main topic of the article is the reduction of traffic by the provider. Incoming traffic remains unchanged, and outgoing traffic is significantly lower. Another disadvantage is that the number of uploaders and peers is much lower than on the external network tracker. Hence, the amount of content of different types is usually much less. However, this minus loses its significance if the tracker is considered to be the official tracker of the provider, inside the network (if it’s just a local private tracker, then this minus is relevant).
Total:
In the absence of p2p traffic cuts by the company, local trackers remain the most popular, convenient and high-speed, and external trackers that are not tied to the internal network of the provider are significantly inferior to the internal ones according to these criteria. This is mainly due to the speed of course.
However, with a serious reduction in traffic, the importance of this falls sharply. Recently, the popularity has received such a phenomenon as retracker. However, in all respects and speeds, this phenomenon is significantly inferior to the inside network trackers, especially the official trackers of the provider. Hence, the search for ways to combat traffic cuts has a key role in supporting popularity within network trackers. Since practice and time shows that the main criticism of local trackers in favor of more extensive external trackers is built precisely on the reduction of traffic by the provider.
Epilogue:
So, in my topic I came to the main conclusion - under the conditions of hard killing of p2p traffic, the best option is to use local trackers within the provider's network. Since at very high speeds, the reduction is not noticeably so much, as well as with bonuses that allow you to correctly control your rating on the tracker. Unfortunately, the intranet trackers are quite a few good and rather large, which is why I wrote my own investigation, so to speak, in order to find convenient ways to bypass the shaper for external network trackers.
I hope my humble first topic is useful to someone and will be useful.
Thanks for reading :)
UPD: I would like to transfer this entry to the Peer-to-Peer thematic blog, but alas, there is not enough karma.
UPD: 2 Thank you transferred. :)
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/71491/
All Articles