Now I got hit by this "connection closed by peer" thingy. 3am here also! So I tested with a new torrent and download won't start because it cannot connect to tracker!

miuk, only those downloads that were already started previously (before this problem) can continue!

YiQi, from your description it seems that another type of packet shaper at work? I wonder if that accounts for those odd ping times outside of Malaysia and Singapore now...



This post has been edited by lex: Jan 18 2007, 03:45 AM

YiQi, I can now confirmed its blocked by detecting "User Agent".

Taken from my own post here: http://forum.lowyat.net/topic/361764/+960

Now can't connect to any peers. Back to 0KB/s again. WEB BROWSING HAS ALSO SLOWED DOWN!!

Ping times now

Local ~ 1100ms!
Sinagpore ~ 1200ms!
USA & rest of the world ~ 1500ms ?!

Conclusion is they now back to their original BT throttling packet/traffic shaper again!

Explanation on yesterday night and this morning sudden speed up and slow downs from my monitoring....

The first speed up is they bypassed the packet shaper. That accounts for the incredible speedup I got yeaterday plus the back to normal ping times I had (local ~ 9ms!). They were probably testing something out then...

Then they started switching routes to another packet shaper which does not throttle encrypted torrent connections BUT capable of blocking tracker connections - probably using simple pass thru protocol inspection, and not deep packet inspection. This caused all those "connection reset by peer" errors. Ping times also jumped suddenly (local ~ 62ms!)

Then today morning, they are back the original packet shaper (which does deep packet inspection) that throttles and keeps disconnecting encrypted torrent connections. Ping times went crazily high (local ~ 900ms!!)

What say you?


Note: Cannot connect to tracker but can download + can connect to tracker but cannot download = 2 different packet shapers?

Normal? Not now for me...

When the packet shaper was off last nite, my browsing went super fast. Web pages loads and displays almost instantly (even with downloading in the background).

As for the pings? Take any one you can think of... Examples of local ones which I've randomly tested...

Pinging 202.188.0.133 with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 202.188.0.133: bytes=32 time=980ms TTL=57
Reply from 202.188.0.133: bytes=32 time=1078ms TTL=57
Reply from 202.188.0.133: bytes=32 time=965ms TTL=57
Reply from 202.188.0.133: bytes=32 time=466ms TTL=57

Ping statistics for 202.188.0.133:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 466ms, Maximum = 1078ms, Average = 872ms

Pinging lowyat.net [202.190.197.144] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 202.190.197.144: bytes=32 time=1034ms TTL=52
Reply from 202.190.197.144: bytes=32 time=1090ms TTL=52
Reply from 202.190.197.144: bytes=32 time=1425ms TTL=52
Reply from 202.190.197.144: bytes=32 time=729ms TTL=52

Ping statistics for 202.190.197.144:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 729ms, Maximum = 1425ms, Average = 1069ms

Pinging ahyap.com [202.75.42.56] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 202.75.42.56: bytes=32 time=1163ms TTL=55
Reply from 202.75.42.56: bytes=32 time=840ms TTL=55
Reply from 202.75.42.56: bytes=32 time=969ms TTL=55
Reply from 202.75.42.56: bytes=32 time=1111ms TTL=55

Ping statistics for 202.75.42.56:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 840ms, Maximum = 1163ms, Average = 1020ms

Average 1 second! Didn't you notice the slight delay loading these pages?

I know that. The point is the ultra high ping times also indicates that the connection is delayed, possibly going thru a long route or too many routers, even packet/traffic shapers. My ping times are utterly ridiculous. For LOCAL PEERS, a one second ping is highly suspicious.

Not working here. Tried both PAWS and BitSpirit. Getting 0KB/s!

My latest pings (only slight improvement, probably because everyone else is "jammed" by TMNutz on my side)....

Pinging lowyat.net [202.190.197.144] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 202.190.197.144: bytes=32 time=953ms TTL=52
Reply from 202.190.197.144: bytes=32 time=1050ms TTL=52
Reply from 202.190.197.144: bytes=32 time=786ms TTL=52
Reply from 202.190.197.144: bytes=32 time=750ms TTL=52

Ping statistics for 202.190.197.144:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 750ms, Maximum = 1050ms, Average = 884ms

Pinging 202.188.0.133 with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 202.188.0.133: bytes=32 time=1042ms TTL=57
Reply from 202.188.0.133: bytes=32 time=974ms TTL=57
Reply from 202.188.0.133: bytes=32 time=774ms TTL=57
Reply from 202.188.0.133: bytes=32 time=892ms TTL=57

Ping statistics for 202.188.0.133:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 774ms, Maximum = 1042ms, Average = 920ms

Pinging yahoo.com [216.109.112.135] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1065ms TTL=46
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=774ms TTL=46
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1310ms TTL=46
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1318ms TTL=46

Ping statistics for 216.109.112.135:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 774ms, Maximum = 1318ms, Average = 1116ms

Looks like my connection is on that BT throtling deep packet inspection one...

Edit: I can connect to trackers here without using proxy or User Agent mods. That's how I arrive at my conclusion. WEB BROWSING is still SLOW here...

This post has been edited by lex: Jan 18 2007, 03:58 PM

YiQi, I do have a rather good connection here. I also have a firewall. Yesterday night I can get the usual pings (before TMNutz throttling mess) when they bypass the packet shapers for a while. Local peers can get consistently BELOW 60ms! Fastest being 9ms This is with my torrent running in the background also! I even tested the mule again.. Same results.

Anyway, ping times update...

Pinging www.3dns.tm.net.my [202.71.97.48] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 202.71.97.48: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=118
Reply from 202.71.97.48: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=118
Reply from 202.71.97.48: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=118
Reply from 202.71.97.48: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=118

Ping statistics for 202.71.97.48:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 11ms, Maximum = 18ms, Average = 13ms

Pinging lowyat.net [202.190.197.144] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 202.190.197.144: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=52
Reply from 202.190.197.144: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=52
Reply from 202.190.197.144: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=52
Reply from 202.190.197.144: bytes=32 time=100ms TTL=52

Ping statistics for 202.190.197.144:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 9ms, Maximum = 100ms, Average = 33ms

All this with torrents running

Speeds picked up a bit now, from 0KB/s to 9.5KB/s.. Another packet shaper bypass?

Edit: Web browsing picked up speed again also!

This post has been edited by lex: Jan 18 2007, 04:59 PM

I wonder how long this will last? See pix...


Attached thumbnail(s)

First they put the packet shaper that causes "connection closed by peer" locally... This kills any torrents trying to start at the tracker.

Pinging lowyat.net [202.190.197.144] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 202.190.197.144: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=53
Reply from 202.190.197.144: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=53
Reply from 202.190.197.144: bytes=32 time=62ms TTL=53
Reply from 202.190.197.144: bytes=32 time=77ms TTL=53

Ping statistics for 202.190.197.144:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 46ms, Maximum = 77ms, Average = 63ms


Then they put the other packet shaper that throttles and kills encrypted torrent connections internationally...

Pinging yahoo.com [216.109.112.135] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=2166ms TTL=40
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=2218ms TTL=40
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=2218ms TTL=40
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=2187ms TTL=41

Ping statistics for 216.109.112.135:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 2166ms, Maximum = 2218ms, Average = 2197ms

The picture tells my story...

This post has been edited by lex: Jan 18 2007, 09:35 PM


Attached thumbnail(s)

Yups, TMNutz is definitely doing some "restructuring" (with their traffic/packet shapers). That accounts for those sudden surges in speeds due to bypassing the shapers, with the intention of either rerouting to new shapers or upgrading existing shapers.

Guess what, that short surge of bandwidth didn't save one download I had since November. Of the 4 last November ones I had, 1 went unfinished and now the tracker replies "Failure: torrent not registered with this tracker".