A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows 7 » Windows 7 Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Download Speed Miserable, then A-OK following PC reboot?



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16  
Old June 15th 18, 03:04 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
(PeteCresswell)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,933
Default Download Speed Miserable, then A-OK following PC reboot?

Per VanguardLH:
Go to ipleak.net. See if its WebRTC reveals your intranet IP address.
With Firefox and media.peerconnection.enabled = False, ipleak.net cannot
discover my intranet IP address.


I am using "Private Internet Access" (a paid service) and it *seems* like
ipleak is happy with it.... at least it shows an IP different from my "Real"
IP address.
--
Pete Cresswell
Ads
  #17  
Old June 15th 18, 03:21 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
(PeteCresswell)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,933
Default Download Speed Miserable, then A-OK following PC reboot?

Per VanguardLH:
gigs/hour) of upload activity.

Tried using a network monitor, like SysInternals' TCPview, to see what
process is generating all the upstream traffic?


Thanks!...

Just installed TCPview and it is looking like my Tivo-On-Steroids DVR app and
a little black box underneath my TV are the source of the "Upload" traffic.

Quotes, because it is strictly over the LAN, not WAN (at least I *think* it
is....) and I had not thought of "Upload" as applying to local LAN traffic.

Also many of the UL speeds were far in excess of what my FIOS service allows.

But killed the SageTV service, watched BitMeter for five minutes and the UL
speed quiesced to a steady 1-1.1.... then I re-started the SageTV service,
bounced the little black box, and it was back to high UL speeds.... so I
guess that's the way it is.
--
Pete Cresswell
  #18  
Old June 15th 18, 04:50 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
The Real GLOBALIST
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default Download Speed Miserable, then A-OK following PC reboot?

Wolf K wrote:
The main disadvantage, apart from the background hogging of the 'net
connection, is that one of the sources may be infected. From my POV
that's a deal-breaker. I haven't used a torrent client in years.


I've been using torrents for over a decade. Not one single malware. I
think the "you'll get infected" crap is from the good folks in the
entertainment industry. Also, if you use Bit Torrent or Deluge, you will
not automatically become a seeder except for what you're downloading.
Once done, you can re3move the torrent and you are no longer seeding.
  #19  
Old June 15th 18, 04:52 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Paul[_32_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,873
Default Download Speed Miserable, then A-OK following PC reboot?

(PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per VanguardLH:
gigs/hour) of upload activity.
Tried using a network monitor, like SysInternals' TCPview, to see what
process is generating all the upstream traffic?


Thanks!...

Just installed TCPview and it is looking like my Tivo-On-Steroids DVR app and
a little black box underneath my TV are the source of the "Upload" traffic.

Quotes, because it is strictly over the LAN, not WAN (at least I *think* it
is....) and I had not thought of "Upload" as applying to local LAN traffic.

Also many of the UL speeds were far in excess of what my FIOS service allows.

But killed the SageTV service, watched BitMeter for five minutes and the UL
speed quiesced to a steady 1-1.1.... then I re-started the SageTV service,
bounced the little black box, and it was back to high UL speeds.... so I
guess that's the way it is.


A digital TV tuner here, produces about 7GB per hour.
Which I guess would be 2MB/sec or so. (This could vary
with SD or HD or higher formats perhaps.)

Is the SageTV upload a lot more than that ?

To see whether the upload is reasonable, you'd have
to compare it to the proposed content.

Paul
  #20  
Old June 15th 18, 05:29 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Char Jackson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,449
Default Download Speed Miserable, then A-OK following PC reboot?

On Fri, 15 Jun 2018 10:14:08 -0400, Wolf K wrote:

AIUI, the torrent clients work by using their users' machines. Once
you've d/l a file, it's available to other users (some clients did ask
for permission, back when I tried them).


Not necessarily limited to after a file has been fully downloaded. In my
experience, any file *segment* that has been successfully downloaded can
be made available to others who are seeking that segment. Seeding starts
as soon as you've successfully downloaded the first segment. That's
probably configurable.

The torrent works by scavenging
and combining pieces of the file from many different sources. From the
users POV this has several advantages: it usually speeds up d/l compared
to a single source (server); it bypasses legitimate sources, which may
charge for the content; it tends to hide the user's identity.


Agreed, except for that last item. I would have said that BT tends to
*reveal* your identity rather than hide it, where identity refers to
your IP address, to multiple strangers, just as it reveals their
identity to you. Everyone who downloads segments of files can see the IP
address of everyone else who is also downloading segments of that file.
That's one of the reasons why people use a VPN when downloading via BT.

The main disadvantage, apart from the background hogging of the 'net
connection, is that one of the sources may be infected. From my POV
that's a deal-breaker. I haven't used a torrent client in years.


The entire file could be infected with malware, although that is
extremely rare, but I don't think it's possible that someone is likely
to figure out a way to infect a single segment. Every segment has to
pass sanity checks after being downloaded and prior to being added to
what has already been downloaded and verified. If someone were to mess
with a segment, it would be discarded as a result of those sanity
checks.

Back in the day, I used to hear of instances where someone, possibly the
RIAA or a major record company, was seeding music files that were
actually just white noise, or sometimes repeated recordings of 'don't
steal this music", but I haven't heard of examples of that in about
10-15 years.

AFAIK, the default or torrent clients is to run in the background.


I've only tried a few over the years, and they all ran in the foreground
by default, although each could be minimized to the tray, if desired.

--

Char Jackson
  #21  
Old June 15th 18, 05:31 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Char Jackson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,449
Default Download Speed Miserable, then A-OK following PC reboot?

On Fri, 15 Jun 2018 10:21:27 -0400, "(PeteCresswell)"
wrote:

Per VanguardLH:
gigs/hour) of upload activity.

Tried using a network monitor, like SysInternals' TCPview, to see what
process is generating all the upstream traffic?


Thanks!...

Just installed TCPview and it is looking like my Tivo-On-Steroids DVR app and
a little black box underneath my TV are the source of the "Upload" traffic.

Quotes, because it is strictly over the LAN, not WAN (at least I *think* it
is....) and I had not thought of "Upload" as applying to local LAN traffic.

Also many of the UL speeds were far in excess of what my FIOS service allows.

But killed the SageTV service, watched BitMeter for five minutes and the UL
speed quiesced to a steady 1-1.1.... then I re-started the SageTV service,
bounced the little black box, and it was back to high UL speeds.... so I
guess that's the way it is.


If that amount of network traffic causes you any issues with the rest of
your LAN or your Internet access, consider isolating it to its own LAN.

--

Char Jackson
  #22  
Old June 15th 18, 09:53 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
croy[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 108
Default Download Speed Miserable, then A-OK following PC reboot?

On Fri, 15 Jun 2018 10:21:27 -0400, "(PeteCresswell)" wrote:


But killed the SageTV service, watched BitMeter for five minutes and the UL
speed quiesced to a steady 1-1.1.... then I re-started the SageTV service,
bounced the little black box, and it was back to high UL speeds.... so I
guess that's the way it is.


Probably old news, but....

http://sagetv.com/:

"We’re thrilled to announce that SageTV has been acquired by Google."

--
croy
  #23  
Old June 15th 18, 11:01 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
VanguardLH[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,881
Default Download Speed Miserable, then A-OK following PC reboot?

PeteCresswell wrote:

Per VanguardLH:

Go to ipleak.net. See if its WebRTC reveals your intranet IP
address. With Firefox and media.peerconnection.enabled = False,
ipleak.net cannot discover my intranet IP address.


I am using "Private Internet Access" (a paid service) and it *seems*
like ipleak is happy with it.... at least it shows an IP different
from my "Real" IP address.


How about the IP address shown by ipleak.net when they use WebRTC?
That will, if allowed, show the IP address of your host, not the
WAN-side IP address of your router.
  #24  
Old June 16th 18, 04:53 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
VanguardLH[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,881
Default Download Speed Miserable, then A-OK following PC reboot?

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

Is that _always_ the case, that you're hosting _unknown_ content, or do
some of the Torrent (networks? I don't know the correct term, never
having participated) only make you pass on the content you wanted - sort
of a "you can have it, as long as you in turn pass it on to others" idea


Well, just how did YOU get it? From someone else. You're one of the
someone else's in the swarm.
  #25  
Old June 16th 18, 12:13 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
J. P. Gilliver (John)[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,679
Default Download Speed Miserable, then A-OK following PC reboot?

In message , VanguardLH
writes:
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

Is that _always_ the case, that you're hosting _unknown_ content, or do
some of the Torrent (networks? I don't know the correct term, never
having participated) only make you pass on the content you wanted - sort
of a "you can have it, as long as you in turn pass it on to others" idea


Well, just how did YOU get it? From someone else. You're one of the
someone else's in the swarm.


I'm not saying you wouldn't be passing on to unknown persons; I was just
asking whether it is always the case (as was implied by the previous
posters) that you are also passing on (and thus storing) unknown
material, rather than just the material _you_ actively downloaded. I've
never used torrenting, but I always understood that it was a
collaborative arrangement - you can download from other torrenters, on
condition that you then let yet other torrenters download from you what
you have downloaded - not _extra_ material you don't know about.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

And if you kill Judi Dench, you can't go back home. - Bill Nighy (on learning
to ride a motorbike [on which she would be side-saddle] for "The Best Exotic
Marigold Hotel"), quoted in Radio Times 18-24 February 2012.
  #26  
Old June 16th 18, 02:10 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
VanguardLH[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,881
Default Download Speed Miserable, then A-OK following PC reboot?

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

I'm not saying you wouldn't be passing on to unknown persons; I was just
asking whether it is always the case (as was implied by the previous
posters) that you are also passing on (and thus storing) unknown
material, rather than just the material _you_ actively downloaded. I've
never used torrenting, but I always understood that it was a
collaborative arrangement - you can download from other torrenters, on
condition that you then let yet other torrenters download from you what
you have downloaded - not _extra_ material you don't know about.


Torrents can work like you describe. As a leech, a file that you
retrieve from one, or more, seeders will also be available with you as a
seeder to other leechers. A central server would probably have a lot
higher upstream bandwidth for you to download the file from them. All
those torrent hosts are home PCs with dismal upstream bandwidth, so
slicing up a file across multiple seeder hosts parallels the file
transfer to effect a higher upstream bandwidth across all those seeder
hosts and you get a higher downstream bandwidth for the file transfer.

I thought there was an option to also employ other torrent hosts through
which the file transfer can happen. That is, instead of a direct
connection from your torrenting host to another torrenting host, a mesh
network of other torrent-capable hosts could be employed for redundancy
or failure recovery. Maybe not. If a seeder host goes down or becomes
unreachable to which you are connected as a leech host then maybe the
torrent client discards that portion of the torrent you captured already
and goes find another seeder host to start all over on getting that
slice of the file. That is, maybe torrents have no resume function with
a prior seeder host from which you were retrieving a file piece.

Could be what I'm thinking about are the VPN providers that punish you
for not allowing traffic from others to use your host's idle bandwidth.
That is, you get slower effective bandwidth through the VPN network if
you don't share your bandwidth with others (which has then passing
anything they want through your host). Another possibility is I'm
mixing up Microsoft's scheme in Windows 10 for deploying updates by
distributing them on their customers' hosts (aka peer-to-peer updating),
so that might be another cause of Pete's mysterious upstream traffic (if
he left that option enabled).

https://www.pcworld.com/article/2955...s-systems.html

https://www.howtogeek.com/141257/htg...ttorrent-work/
mentions using trackerless torrents. That means a node in the swarm has
to contact other nodes in the swarm instead of a central server
proffering the tracker data. That would not mean you get any files on
your host that you didn't ask for; however, it does mean your host is
involved in searches by other nodes in the swarm looking for a file.
That means your torrent client has to generate traffic to talk with all
the other "nearby" nodes in the swarm. The article didn't define what
"nearby" means.

You might be correct that you don't host any files that you never
requested, or it is something client-side configurable in the mesh
network that the swarm uses to decentralize the location of the file.
There is a lot of voodoo-speak about torrents, so it's tough to pin down
just how it works unless you get into the client code of which I have no
interest. Because of the similar naming, Tor can be confused with
torrenting (P2P file sharing protocol) over the Tor mesh network.
However, the more I read about torrenting the less it seems to be about
privacy since the seeder and leech clients have to communicate and dole
out their IP addresses to each other -- and anyone can operate a torrent
node, including the gov't (just like anyone, including the gov't can
operate entrance and exit TOR nodes). The seeder site has to know where
to deliver the file requested by the leech node. Tor means having to
trust whoever operates an entrance and exit node aren't the same
operator. Tor does get mapped; for example, see:

https://www.wired.com/2015/09/mappin...-around-world/

Knowing who runs a Tor node and where they are doesn't mean your traffic
is subourned. You are trusting an unknown (to you) Tor node operator
with your traffic. The bulk of funding for development of Tor comes
from the US gov't (https://pando.com/2014/07/16/tor-spooks/). I can see
how entrance and exit nodes get mapped, and anyone can operate one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor_(a...rk)#Weaknesses

Since traffic through the Tor network isn't secure unless encrypted,
then what's the difference from using HTTPS, FTPS, or other encrypted
protocol? Oh, that the endpoints are hidden (but only if you trust the
Tor nodes to not exploit weaknesses in Tor), like your ISP cannot see to
target site, which is what VPNs do, too.

Sometimes it's hard to keep separate Tor from the tor-named protocols
(e.g., torrent) that run on the Tor network. Tor this, tor that.
  #27  
Old June 16th 18, 04:50 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Char Jackson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,449
Default Download Speed Miserable, then A-OK following PC reboot?

On Sat, 16 Jun 2018 08:10:48 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

Sometimes it's hard to keep separate Tor from the tor-named protocols
(e.g., torrent) that run on the Tor network. Tor this, tor that.


There's no relationship between Tor (The Onion Router project) and
Bittorrent (decentralized distributed file transfer). Like java versus
javascript, they just share similar names.

--

Char Jackson
  #28  
Old June 16th 18, 11:02 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
VanguardLH[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,881
Default Download Speed Miserable, then A-OK following PC reboot?

Char Jackson wrote:

VanguardLH wrote:

Sometimes it's hard to keep separate Tor from the tor-named protocols
(e.g., torrent) that run on the Tor network. Tor this, tor that.


There's no relationship between Tor (The Onion Router project) and
Bittorrent (decentralized distributed file transfer). Like java versus
javascript, they just share similar names.


You're probably right. Bad naming convention, similar to how Microsoft
confuses products with similar or reused names.
  #29  
Old June 17th 18, 04:33 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
J. P. Gilliver (John)[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,679
Default Download Speed Miserable, then A-OK following PC reboot?

In message , Char Jackson
writes:
On Sat, 16 Jun 2018 08:10:48 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

Sometimes it's hard to keep separate Tor from the tor-named protocols
(e.g., torrent) that run on the Tor network. Tor this, tor that.


There's no relationship between Tor (The Onion Router project) and
Bittorrent (decentralized distributed file transfer). Like java versus
javascript, they just share similar names.

So, does _either_ of them involve you passing on (and thus storing, at
least temporarily) material of which you know nothing?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

And if you kill Judi Dench, you can't go back home. - Bill Nighy (on learning
to ride a motorbike [on which she would be side-saddle] for "The Best Exotic
Marigold Hotel"), quoted in Radio Times 18-24 February 2012.
  #30  
Old June 17th 18, 06:08 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
Char Jackson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,449
Default Download Speed Miserable, then A-OK following PC reboot?

On Sun, 17 Jun 2018 04:33:00 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message , Char Jackson
writes:
On Sat, 16 Jun 2018 08:10:48 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

Sometimes it's hard to keep separate Tor from the tor-named protocols
(e.g., torrent) that run on the Tor network. Tor this, tor that.


There's no relationship between Tor (The Onion Router project) and
Bittorrent (decentralized distributed file transfer). Like java versus
javascript, they just share similar names.

So, does _either_ of them involve you passing on (and thus storing, at
least temporarily) material of which you know nothing?


Not that I'm aware of, but I've never used Tor (only read about it) and
I rarely use BT, so I may have missed something regarding that aspect.
There used to be a concept of a BT Supernode, so in that case I assume
the answer could be yes, but I don't know if that's still a thing. I
don't believe it's a default, assuming it does still exist.

--

Char Jackson
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.