Is Shaw throttling BT?
p2pnet.net News:- Canadian ISP Shaw has started using packet shaping technology to throttle the bandwidth of its Bit Torrent users, says broadbandreports, quoting a “self-proclaimed company insider”.
” ‘This came about due to customer complaints about High-Speed Internet being… well… not high-speed,’ the self-professed insider proclaims.
"Turns out there was a lot (A LOT) in BT traffic in Vancouver, so much so that it was causing congestion in the RF/Fiber cable plant, or so I’ve been told. Cost to fix: $2 to $3 million".
The report, from Karl Bode, says Shaw allegedly green-lighted the use of an Ellacoya switch to limit Bit Torrent traffic at various hubs on the Shaw network.
“While the idea started in the Cordova area of Vancouver, the source claims, it has now been applied to the entire Shaw network in order to regain some of their ‘lost’ bandwidth,” says Bode, adding:
“Of course once you take the route of throttling applications, users – when not giving you a verbal black eye – begin their quest to get around the bandwidth blockade. Shaw users are already eyeing open-source pre-alpha workarounds (like Rodi), waiting for them to evolve in order to beat the efforts of the ISP’s.”
Wot Rodi?
It’s a brand-new p2p project. And then some.
“Rodi or Rodia (Ρόδι or Ροδιά) means pomegranate in Greek,” says the intro. "The Rodi program is a tiny P2P client/host (under 300K of binary code) implemented in pure Java. It’s network use is similar to the bitTorrent concept.
"The program will serve the filesharing community with fast data delivery and serve the Open Source community by facilitating faster software deployment.”
The Rodi team comprises: Arkady (principle developer) and William Jordan (beta testing, online documentation)
(Thanks, catflap)
Something you think we should know? tips[at]p2pnet.net
<————-Now touch these wires to your tongue! ————–>
See:-
broadbandreports – Shaw Throttling Bit Torrent?, April 7, 2005
April 7th, 2005 at 3:21 pm
I think this is fairly well known in Vancouver by now. Shaw doesn’t post anything publicly about it, but they don’t deny it. As a user of multiple high-speed internet services in Vancouver, I can confirm that Bittorrrent on Shaw is slower than competing services by a factor of 10x. And it’s not just Bittorrent, their traffic throttling is also applied to several other popular p2p services. Makes you wonder what exactly use customers are expected to get out of the upcoming speed increase Shaw announced yesterday (standard service to be boosted from 3 Mbps to 5 Mbps download).
April 7th, 2005 at 8:29 pm
This has been happening to me (and several others) on the Cablevision Optimum Online network in the NYC area as of February or so.
Thread is going on dslreports.com as well.
April 7th, 2005 at 8:43 pm
So who are we supposed to us for broadband in Vancouver?
Telus has a download cap per moth.
Rogers doesn’t let you set up a home server.
And Shaw throttles bittorent.
Its pretty infuriating. Whatever happened to cosumer rights?
April 8th, 2005 at 5:21 am
Shaw are installing these filtering systems in order to free up lost bandwidth so that they can tell everyone “we just increased your bandwidth from 3mbps to 5mbps!” They KNOW the only people going to be using the full speed of their shaw line are DOWNLOADERS so why bother throttling the people and trying to use it as a marketing toy?
April 8th, 2005 at 5:31 am
Actually Shaw claims that their problem is with upload, not download. They have plenty of download bandwidth to spare, but the cable network wasn’t designed for heavy use of upload bandwidth. Unfortunately for them and their customers, most p2p apps require upload/download balancing, leading to heavier-than-expected use of upload bandwidth. The just-announced speed upgrade is for download only – upload is unaffected.
April 8th, 2005 at 12:56 pm
When they choke/throttle network traffic like this, do they do it based on protocol type or port number? Or both? Can you circumvent filters by simply using nonstandard port numbers?
April 8th, 2005 at 2:41 pm
At first the throttling could be circumvented by using non-standard port numbers, but that stopped working after a while.
April 8th, 2005 at 2:43 pm
It used to be port number, until P2P apps (starting with Kazaa 2) became “smart” (read: more evasive) by varying the ports they use in no decernible manner. Port blocking just doesn’t work anymore, unless you’re willing to block all ports except for 80 – an unpopular, unmanagable move.
Most likely, Ellacoya’s boxes inspects each packets that goes through them for a protocol signature, and then pushes non-p2p through first while severly limiting the p2p that goes through.
<sarcasm> Ah, the wonders of technology. </sarcasm>
Seriously though, if you’re a Shaw customer, call them up and complain. There are other solutions out there that aren’t as blatenly subscriber-unfriendly as Ellacoya’s – and get the same benefits.
April 9th, 2005 at 12:12 am
Rogers has a download cap now too.
And now that you mention it, my download speeds have sucked the royal patootie lately.
What exactly ARE you paying for if it’s not high speed?????
Just so some web pages load fast? Not like mail comes in quick.
Sheesh.
Criminal, everyone of the cableco’s.
I read one good post that if one of the Ultra High Speed users on Roger’s network actually USED their full bandwidth, they’d break the cap in 3 days.
3 days!!!
Of course, they’d be cut off from service at that time, too.
April 9th, 2005 at 12:16 am
Here…
http://larytet.sourceforge.net/howto.shtml
April 9th, 2005 at 5:18 am
Legal, first of all how much of the downloading you do is legal. I use bit torrent but only to download thinks liek new linux distro’s (they compleain I do to much of this but thats cause my software toosl total over 30 gb a month some months) it’s the fact that most people are downloading movies not legal content that means that this will effect everyone
April 19th, 2005 at 7:43 pm
Yes Shaw is throttleing BitTorrent.
Downloads have gone from a max speed of 640Kb/s down to around 100Kb/s and uploads have gone from 110Kb/s to 15-20Kb/s.
Now we just need everyone who has been screwed by this to cancel any business they have with Shaw and move to any alternative available.
January 15th, 2006 at 10:37 pm
Hey
I called and talked to Rogers myself and it seems that they can not take the filter off.
Kaleena told me they ARE using filter!!
I suggest switching to 3web. They are a cable internet company and with 6mb service 24.95 a month and $5 for modem rental. I talked to TRACY one of their service reps and there is NO TRAFFIC FILTERING!!
http://www.3web.com/
1-866-Get 3web
March 5th, 2006 at 11:08 pm
3web use rogers cable for their internet service, so 3web can not avoid p2p filter. If you want to switch to 3web, I recommend switch to 3web dsl. now I am using 3web cable, the bt download speed only can reach 15k/s
March 10th, 2006 at 6:13 pm
Yeah but 3web is just a reseller of Shaw…..so any throttling imposed by shaw will also affect 3web.
April 5th, 2007 at 2:41 pm
Guys, Shaw is only letting you go to speed test sites now for a full bandwidth experience. Everything–not just BT is now being slyly downgraded. Folks, when they say you should get 10 megs typical and you only get three on a consistent basis, this is FRAUD. False and misleading advertising. Shaw should be regulated or sued.
April 5th, 2007 at 2:41 pm
Guys, Shaw is only letting you go to speed test sites now for a full bandwidth experience. Everything–not just BT is now being slyly downgraded. Folks, when they say you should get 10 megs typical and you only get three on a consistent basis, this is FRAUD. False and misleading advertising. Shaw should be regulated or sued.
April 5th, 2007 at 2:42 pm
Guys, Shaw is only letting you go to speed test sites now for a full bandwidth experience. Everything–not just BT is now being slyly downgraded. Folks, when they say you should get 10 megs typical and you only get three on a consistent basis, this is FRAUD. False and misleading advertising. Shaw should be regulated or sued.