Teksavvy and Bittorrent

[JoeHill]

Lennart Sorensen left a post-it on the fridge:

> On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 11:10:54AM -0400, JoeHill wrote:
> > Finally got around to signing up for Teksavvy, no more dealing with the
> > robots at Sympatico, yay!
> > 
> > Having some of the same issues with my connection and wondering if all of
> > them are to do with the fact that the physical connection is still to Bell's
> > hardware.
> > 
> > In particular, I am finding that Bittorrent in problematic. With Sympatico I
> > was showing in Azureus as being firewalled a lot of the time, and download
> > speeds are really slow. This is seemingly continuing with Teksavvy. Uploads
> > are incredibly slow, or nonexistent, usually meaning that something is
> > preventing incoming connections altogether, IIRC.
> > 
> > Anyone have any experience with this, or know how I could test on my end
> > what might be interfering? I know that with Sympatico I was frequently
> > showing problems with my upstream bandwidth, and this is something I'm
> > going to have Teksavvy check into, but if there's some tool I can try on my
> > end to see what's going on, that would be cool too.  
> 
> Are you running a firewall?  You almost certainly are, in which case
> maybe it is telling you the right thing.  You usually want a certain
> port range open for incoming traffic assigned to your bittorrent client.
> With many of the router boxes you can have the bit torrent client open
> and forward ports automatically using upnp, while others require you
> manually forwarding a port range and telling the client to bind to those
> port numbers.

I should have mentioned, I already have a port forwarded for Bittorrent. My
router, a fairly old implementation of the floppy-based firewall distro thing,
does not have an option for forwarding ranges of ports. I use a higher port
because of the specific torrent site that I frequent (49152). That worked
really great for about a couple of years (coupled with transport encryption) in
getting around Sympatico's anti-bittorrent machinations.
 
> I always use bittornado (btlaunchmanycurses specifically).  Seems to be
> the best there is.

I'll check that out, I would like to use a client that consumes a little less
overhead than Azureus, but it has always worked really well for me in the past.

If one was suspicious that there was still some sympatico shenanigans going on,
how would one test that out? Traffic analyzer?

Thanks!

-- 
JoeHill
++++++++++++++++++++
 Fry: What are we going to do? 
 Professor: Duh, I know, let's play the lottery. 
 Amy: No, let's buy internet stock.
 Zoidberg: On margin! Zoidbee wants to buy on margin.
 Hermes: Look at me! I'm invisible.
 Fry: Wait a minute, I know what's going on here. You've all become idiots.
 Bender: Hey, let's go join the Reform party!
 Everyone: Yeah! 
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists