Is still 1 because the VPN is one connection straight to the server. Once on the server, it becomes multiple connections.

This post has been edited by TC_Boy: Nov 6 2006, 04:39 PM

if tm@nut dares to cap corporate user's vpn or ssh then they will see tons of law suits thrown at them by these big corporate users. it will be out on the news everywhere if that happens and tm@nut will never hear the end of it from those big corporations. imo tm@nut will not temper with these services because of these big corparate users.

What u saying maybe true.
from vpn server the the encrypted single connection will become multiple connection
and actually vpn task is double handling
any task that involve double handling, there will be some part will become a waste

Well you see problem is very few companies use VPN to send large amounts of data.Even for banks a dedicated dual channel 128kbps ISDN line will work for transfering databases across branches.Of course more is better.

The VPN just works like a pipe.Virtual as it implies, it creates a non physical pipe/tunnel/connection between you and the secure server.It's basically a proxy so at the end of the day it still depends on TMnet's network to connect you to the overseas server.Data that is being send across the connection established between you and the server is encrypted.The only benefit that you'll get is that the data is only between you and the tuneling service provider.They'll provide the necessary connection to the servers/peers you request to connect to and send it back to you over the secured link without your isp,the government and 3rd parties from knowing unless they are capable of intercepting these packets.

Earlier we used this tunneling service because it could hide P2P packets from being detected by TMnet's P2P filtering solution.But it's a matter of time before they'll notice about the high bandwidth/traffic of users connecting to these secure tunneling servers.All they have to do is to shape the connection speed to these server ips and poof! we get throttled once again.Even if your tunneling service client can establish multiple connections back to its server, you're back to square one when your overseas connection is limited.

This post has been edited by tirumisu: Nov 6 2006, 05:08 PM

What you were saying is right. But, do they have the right to do so? I meant who knows what the VPN users doing. If they transfer large data for research, who knows? Is it legal to do so?

Subscribers deserve their own privacy.The way you brought it up it worries me quite a bit.It hints that our isps are reading what we see on our computer screen if they wanted too.I may sound paranoid but our isps, other people and even the government has no right to interfere unless it involves huge concerns for the country.It's absolutely against human rights and unethical.

Come on let's say if I'm a research student doing some important research and I made a significant discovery.If you were that position do you want your data stolen or published by someone else in some journal claiming that it's his work?You may also not want people seeing what you upload into your personal ftp/hosting server don't you?

This post has been edited by tirumisu: Nov 6 2006, 05:25 PM

That's exactly my point. TMNet not supposed to throttle VPN but hell, who knows what will they do next.

They are not getting pass the encryption lar especially with it being double encrypted if you use VPN & your bittorrent encryption is turned on. They are just detecting it based on the bittorrent signature in the encrypted connections.

This post has been edited by TC_Boy: Nov 6 2006, 08:21 PM

Why is that proof? It could simply be that their servers are limited in terms of bandwidth available to all its users.
Myself and a few others that still use secure-tunnel utilise all our potential bandwidth and are not restricted to 20kB/s. Indeed I am upgrading my half meg system to a 1MB to get more upload speed. (Currently havng difficulty mainatining my ratio on private tracker).
Besides if the limit is say 20kB/s per peer and using such tunneling methodology allows full peer access then ones bandwidth is utilised with just 6 peers on a 1M setup.
The whole torrenting setup is designed to even the download across peers so it is rare to get such a speed from a single peer anyway if you are connected to plenty of peers. For example right now on a UK tracker I am connected to 30 peers and the highest from a single peer is 3.2kB/s but I am still maximising my download bandwidth of approx 60kB/s (half meg system currently)

This post has been edited by ocdetective: Nov 6 2006, 08:23 PM

That's misguiding.It still relies on the connection between you and the VPN server to allow that 6 peers traffic to reach you.The VPN service does not allow you to make 6 different connections to these peers to max out your 1M setup.Al of the packets sent by them will be forwarded through a single connection established betwen you and the VPN server.

You see the problem is if my 1500kbps connection can download over 100kB/s from a US server I won't be complaining.It's can hardly achieve 30kB/s.

The thing is Streamyx dont see the individual connections only the sum of the parts and like I said there is no problem encountered with secure-tunnel. Again I would suggest a limitation with the server you are using not TMNET throttling.
Just so you know I experienced something similar end of last week (20kB/s maximum) and wrote to secure-tunnel asking if there was a problem at their end and in fairness to their honesty they admitted there was and it was rectified within 24 hours and now I am back at normal speeds. Have you tried contacting your provider?

It's a little hard to pass that off as a problem on all the fserves, newsgroup servers and HTTP servers that suffer from that exact problem. Unless there's some weird virus going around that caps infected server uploads to 20kB/s.

In all fairness, what you propose is entirely plausible and worth checking up on.

Either way, be it a problem on Streamyx' side or the other side of the connection, it is certainly a very very strange situation to have a distinct speed limitation on each IP as well as the ability to hit the line maximum if you're connected to enough IPs.

@ocdetective,

what BT client are you using? Can you show me a screenshot of the connection per torrent etc setting that you are using ? I am using uTorrent. Although HTTP-Tunnel initally worked and boosted my download speed, I have been not able to reach above 30Kbps a few days later and it has been this way ever since. I tried again a few minutes as my account is still valid and didn't notice any improvement at all. If you guys are enjoying 20Kbps PER PEER, it is an extremely favourable situation already. I couldn't even reach above a total of 20 or 30 Kbps for all my torrents in daytime with or without HTTP-Tunnel.
but one evidence I have which contradict the theory that they are limiting the speed per connection to 20Kbs is FTP download. I can easily reach 70 to 80 Kbps and has even reached 130 and 140 Kbps before with a capable server. the conclusion that we can arrive at is that either TMnet hasn't throttled FTP traffic "yet" or something totally unaccounted-for is causing the distinct speed limitation.

just a matter of time. believe the hype

I am using azureus - but I am not using HTTP Tunnel I am using secure-tunnel. As the torrents I download have a lot of seeds I would never see a 20kbps per peer situation (that was a theoretical maximum proposed by someone else). As I mentioned earlier rather they are spread across a number of seeders/peers often with the maximum no more than 3.2kbps - but when I am connected to 20+ there is never a problem in maxing out my bandwidth in such a scenario.
My connection setup is exactly the same as that given in the wiki for azureus for a 512k/256k down/up setup.

Just to clarify (yet again), a maximum 20kB/s per peer does not mean that all of the peers hit the maximum. Torrent peer connections usually have slow speeds per peer because most people throttle their upload speeds.

The 20kB/s per peer maximum limit I mentioned is clearer when using HTTP or newsgroup downloads.

Indeed. A 20kB/s per peer (torrent) situation is highly unusual as for someone with a half meg "up" setup that is a third of their bandwidth to just one leecher. Torrents very rarely work that if if they are well populated.

One thing though, how come some areas are not throttled yet? Cyberjaya you can only get 5-8 KBps

From what I've seen, penang suffer the least.
Johor seems to be fine too..Not much of my friends complaint.

Bcoz TMNet is thorttling all those high bandwidth use areas first, and never bother with those area that has low broadband penetrations (yes this CONTRDICT on what they say distrubuting it equally)

The first few areas that got hit by throttling are areas that has alot of students, especially college students. These students normally if they have streamyx connection @home or @rented home they will BT until like there is no tomorrow for their... stuffz >_<

I was unlucky bcoz my home area is located super near with TARC, therefore my area has alot of students renting room, homes, etc. So i was throttled at one of the earliest phase which is around early september.

Some users just start encountering throttling around october.

Some areas like Bukit Mertajam in Penang is still unthrottled >_<