Fibre Broadband - Traffic Shaping

Hi all,

I have a FTTC broadband through 'Mailbox Networks / 186k'. The speeds are pretty good (21 down, 7.5up). I've no problem with the speeds (test result below). I do have an issue with what appears to be traffic shaping, or throttling of certain types of traffic. iPlayer, Windows Update, file download are all really fast. Bittorrent on the other hand will hardly work... barely any traffic will pass. I also have an ADSL2 O2 business line (7down, 1 up) which is rock solid, albeit slower. Bittorrent traffic will fly on this line. I actually have to swap to this line for this type of download.

Originally the problem affected all bittorrent + YouTube and iplayer. I raised this with them and over the course of 3-4 weeks managed to get them to change something and allow youtube and iplayer to work properly, although they never accepted they were traffic shaping.

Do people have the same trouble with other FTTC broadband providers?

Can anyone recommend another ISP were the download caps are high & traffic isn;t throttled?


Thanks all,

Aaron


http://www.speedtest.net/result/1636573800.png

Aaron,

Your last question really is a stumbling point, everyone wants the highest possible cap and the lowest possible throttle (ideally none that is). There are lots of ISP's offering FTTC. Orly and Yarwell have this doc to show some of the providers.

Personally I'm on Plusnet. I have a 120GB a month cap that is unmetered 00:00 through to 08:00. They do have shaping, but if you opt for the Pro add-on, you can get a better service (note the use of better, they state that they will still prioritise trafic at peak times). I use a torrent client where I can restrict downloads and uploads to only take place during those times.

In reply to a post by aaronshim:

Can anyone recommend another ISP were the download caps are high & traffic isn;t throttled?

It's called a leased line

But more seriously it does come down to money. You are asking to have a greater share of your ISP's resources. That increases their costs and they will want to recoup that.

well i have no problems with bt infinity m8, i can quite regular get the full speed on torrents, and they no longer have any download restrictions, totally unlimited.

I see that with the new 80/20 service next year, the minimum download rate on the assured rate product will be 30Mbps

Ignore Anonymous. Check out Zen, ADSL24, PlusNet, etc.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

I see that with the new 80/20 service next year, the minimum download rate on the assured rate product will be 30Mbps

Throughput or sync?

Assured rate is throughput

I wondered if you really meant the assured rate - but knowing you it was probable .

Any idea what price that will be compared to bog-standard "up to"? What about assured rate on 40/20? It's probably around somewhere, but I've never seen any prices or it mentioned as being used by anyone.

Must be hard to ignore the truth

In reply to a post by orly:

Must be hard to ignore the truth

What part of the truth. ADSL24 to not block ports, do not shape and off-peak IS unlimited.

DrT

In reply to a post by DrTeeth:

In reply to a post by orly:

Must be hard to ignore the truth

What part of the truth. ADSL24 to not block ports, do not shape and off-peak IS unlimited.

Where's the ??

I agree to a large extent with what orly said about Zadek's post. The Anonymous poster made a perfectly sensible comment which should not be ignored.

ADSL24 is of course a perfectly reasonable recommendation by Zadek and yourself.

In reply to a post by Zadeks:

Ignore Anonymous. Check out Zen, ADSL24, PlusNet, etc.

Of those ISPs above only plusnets FTTC is cheaper than BT (also traffic managed), the other two are more expensive for less allowance than BT.

Since I don't use P2P BT Infinity is fine for me, nothing else seems to be throttled.

Did you read the OP's post? He uses BitTorrent. PN will remove the shaping if one pays a little extra.

The only problem being that the peak time is 16 hours a day? It's very easy to say it's unshaped when you lock people down to tiny peak time allowances. Sounds like a form of rather aggressive throttling to me. We'll ignore the price too unless you go for the really low usage options.

My post was related to Zadeks telling the original poster to ignore people recommending BT. He keeps reappearing in these sorts of threads from time to time until I correct him on his flawed understanding of how the service works. Then he disappears for a while.

Edited by orly (Sat 10-Dec-11 15:33:08)

Exactly, what they give with one hand they take with the other.

This is why I am having such a hard time working out what ISP is best for me, none of them seem to offer what I am looking for apart from the likes of BT.

In reply to a post by Matt182:

Exactly, what they give with one hand they take with the other.

This is why I am having such a hard time working out what ISP is best for me, none of them seem to offer what I am looking for apart from the likes of BT.

Sounds like you need to start a new thread saying what you want to do on it . See if any of us can help, rather than confuse this one.

That was not my Intention, was just backing up what orly was saying that’s all

Yes I did and it is possible to get around the shaping on bitorrent on BT I believe. Which is probably what the anonymous poster was doing.

In reply to a post by orly:

The only problem being that the peak time is 16 hours a day? It's very easy to say it's unshaped when you lock people down to tiny peak time allowances. Sounds like a form of rather aggressive throttling to me. We'll ignore the price too unless you go for the really low usage options.

My peak time is 12 hrs a day on the Office pro with ADSL 24.

Throttling and shaping are IMHO no way similar or analogous to a full-speed peak time up front allowance. People choose their own peak-time allowances - you make is sound like the ISPs are doing something underhand.

DrT

In reply to a post by Matt182:

That was not my Intention, was just backing up what orly was saying that’s all

I wasn't criticising. Just that someone may be able to help, and if you fancy that then a new thread would be best .

The only way I know how to bypass the shaping on Infinity is via VPN. Not bad if you already have VPN capability for other uses, but if you don't that's extra expense on top of your monthly costs.

I went with Plusnet for a few reasons. Though they do have a few cons to go with the pros as well.

Pros:

A: 120GB peak allowance - plenty for me, equates to 4GB a day, and most days im at work, all my downloading is done overnight anyway.

B: Honest about shaping - Unlike other ISPs with vague FUPs, Plusnet come clean with what you should expect from your connection, with regards to speed at certain times of the day via certain protocols.

C: The ability to disable shaping altogether - Something Infinity does not have, an extra £5 a month to Plusnet, and there is no shaping, end of. Even with the extra £5, it only takes the monthly fee up to £26.49 for 120GB peak usage (8am-midnight) and absolutely unlimited off-peak. I did close to 1TB last month off-peak and I didn't even have to try that hard.

D: Option of a Static IP - I'm not sure if Infinity has this option, but I didn't think so.

Cons:

A: The 120GB peak time allowance counts upload traffic as well, not a major problem for me, but for other people that upload lots, that could be a problem.

B: No 10Mbit upload option - for now you are stuck with the 2Mbit upload variant. Though they do have plans to provide the 10Mbit option in future, along with the 20Mbit option when it is released.

C: No IPv6 yet - again they have plans to provide it in future, it's in the trial stages, but it's not that important for me - but may be a problem for others.

Edited by reddev86 (Sat 10-Dec-11 19:18:46)

In reply to a post by reddev86:

The only way I know how to bypass the shaping on Infinity is via VPN. Not bad if you already have VPN capability for other uses, but if you don't that's extra expense on top of your monthly costs.

No probs with traffic shaping here with Bittorrent and infinity. Use a client such as Utorrent and just force encryption. Always max out my connection at any time of the day, depending on seeds of course...

In reply to a post by sparky76:

No probs with traffic shaping here with Bittorrent and infinity. Use a client such as Utorrent and just force encryption. Always max out my connection at any time of the day, depending on seeds of course...

Ah ok, I had assumed that even with encryption forced, theyd still be able to identify the protocol, fair play.

It becomes underhand when they pull the "we don't shape your connection" card out of the hat. If they similarly impose rather long peak periods with a relatively small allowance then i'd definitely say it qualifies.

You can determine if the peak allowances are small by first taking account of the fact that an FTTC connection, running at an "average" 30Mbit/s, can move 9720GB of data in a month. If your connection is in "peak" 12 hours a day and "off peak" 12 hours a day then assume the "off peak" time is fine and dandy. Take therefore the assumption that during the "peak" your average FTTC connection can, ideally, move 4860GB of data. Then take your current allotted peak time allowance and work out what the proportion is. Attempt not to be annoyed at the result.

Or, join BT, and not worry about it in the slighest as peak time does not exist and, from my experience over the last 17 months, slow downs are far less than would require them to institute half the day being "throttled by GB allowance"

Generally, throttling at an ISP level works by either crude blocking of ports right through to analysis of the types of traffic, the protocols in use, and the duration of the connections between hosts on the network. An HTTP request for example will look rather different to a torrent download. Unfortunately for ISPs, any system can be defeated or at least compromised when people come up with a new system that works against them.

In any event, the assumption that BT actively throttle any protocol or port on an infinity connection is also flawed. Unfortunately it seems to be peddled relentlessly by some. My experience, as someone using the service for 17 months, suggests it simply isn't true. If one takes time to read the published BT policy on usage they'll see it specifically states that no protocols are blocked as a matter of course. Furthermore no protocols are prioritised. P2P applications "may be managed" at "peak times" which is essentially "during the day and evenings".

In simplified terms this translates as "We'll only manage P2P and we'll only manage it on the occasions when it starts having an impact on overall service".

It's why I find the "but BT traffic shape your Bit Torrents!" posters even more funny. You'd think they'd understand how foolish they look when they come out with statements such as this - with no evidence and no experience of the situation (as they are almost always users of other (more expensive) ISPs). Essentially, these types are paying more for a service that is actually more actively throttled than BT's one. Their perceptions obviously played a decision in their original ISP selection process but as explained the perceptions are faulty. I can understand this would be rather frustrating so the default response, rather than find fault with their own ISPs or their own purchasing decisions, is to find fault with the decisions and ISPs of others.

Psychology...a simple science

Edited by orly (Sun 11-Dec-11 02:59:42)

Oh I wasn't attacking BT, in fact when I was choosing ISP, I was tempted by Infinity, just a few small things swung me towards Plusnet, such as the option of a static IP, and the community aspect of the ISP, not to mention the cash back I get for my existing referrals, think my FTTC actually costs me about £12.50 a month, when my referrals are taken into consideration.

In reply to a post by orly:

If one takes time to read the published BT policy on usage they'll see it specifically states that no protocols are blocked as a matter of course. Furthermore no protocols are prioritised.

I was aware of this, but I'd actually see this as a disadvantage. I'd want the more bandwidth-critical protocols such as VoIP, VPN and gaming traffic given priority over others during busy periods, which I now have.

I've actually recommended Infinity for a few friends, for the price you can't really get any better value for money at the moment.

It's only a disadvantage if there isn't enough capacity in the first place which is likely to be the case if one is spending peanuts per month.

In reply to a post by Zadeks:

It's only a disadvantage if there isn't enough capacity in the first place which is likely to be the case if one is spending peanuts per month.

and then you might be at the top of the priority list, but still stuck in a "lack of capacity" issue. Capacity is always required, and a growing FTTC customer base will be a big jump for many ISPs.

In reply to a post by orly:

Generally, throttling at an ISP level works by either crude blocking of ports right through to analysis of the types of traffic, the protocols in use, and the duration of the connections between hosts on the network. An HTTP request for example will look rather different to a torrent download. Unfortunately for ISPs, any system can be defeated or at least compromised when people come up with a new system that works against them.

Crude systems can be like this. Good systems are rather better.

Last time I tried, Plusnet's system was perfectly capable of detecting P2P stuff on odd ports, even when encrypted. It wasn't very defeatable - but things might have changed; I guess it is an ongoing battle

In any event, the assumption that BT actively throttle any protocol or port on an infinity connection is also flawed. Unfortunately it seems to be peddled relentlessly by some. My experience, as someone using the service for 17 months, suggests it simply isn't true. If one takes time to read the published BT policy on usage they'll see it specifically states that no protocols are blocked as a matter of course. Furthermore no protocols are prioritised. P2P applications "may be managed" at "peak times" which is essentially "during the day and evenings".

In simplified terms this translates as "We'll only manage P2P and we'll only manage it on the occasions when it starts having an impact on overall service".

The only problem is that you have no real idea what you are signing up for until you try it - and with 18 month contracts, you're locked in for an awfully long time, with little recourse if "things" start to happen.

Now, note that this statement of fact has 2 different consequences for 2 different groups.

For avid P2P people, they'd prefer that "management" never happens, and hope that either BT don't see P2P "having an impact" or BT find it impossible to manage effectively. But if P2P gets out of hand and it *is* possible to manage, then your 17 month period may turn out to be no more than a lucky honeymoon. Imagine a 1 month honeymoon and 17 months with dire P2P service instead!

For non-P2P people, they want precisely the opposite. A fast, stable network that prioritises interactive & time critical protocols that doesn't get any interference from the sheer volume of P2P. If BT fail to control P2P, this group run the risk of being locked into an 18 month contract with terrible behaviour - akin to the worst of Virgin's latency problems.

Which way will it go? The problem is that we just don't know yet. On one hand, BT's "unlimited" policy means it is very attractive to the very worst-case P2P 24-7 max volume crowd - so BT are more likely to get to the point of needing to manage. On the other hand, if they fail to control things, then they have access to Plusnet's expertise on traffic management.

It's why I find the "but BT traffic shape your Bit Torrents!" posters even more funny. You'd think they'd understand how foolish they look when they come out with statements such as this - with no evidence and no experience of the situation (as they are almost always users of other (more expensive) ISPs). Essentially, these types are paying more for a service that is actually more actively throttled than BT's one. Their perceptions obviously played a decision in their original ISP selection process but as explained the perceptions are faulty. I can understand this would be rather frustrating so the default response, rather than find fault with their own ISPs or their own purchasing decisions, is to find fault with the decisions and ISPs of others.

I agree with you regarding the evidence & experience. So far BT *have* been able to cope with the P2P levels thrown at it so far.

With ADSL, it took a while for congestion to start hitting throughput, and FTTC will be the same: but still, congestion will come eventually. We subscribers just don't know (yet) how the chips will fall, or when. BT probably does know, but chooses not to tell us.

I'm only a casual P2P user (Linux disks, etc), and have far stronger requirements that I can predict that my connection stays usable throughout the day, throughout my contract period, without uncontrolled (and uncontrollable) interference from others. The Plusnet package gives me the best of both worlds on this, but I think it happens to give me one very great advantage: The mere existence of peak hour limits keeps the very worst bandwidth abusers on someone else's ISP!

So yes, I am deliberately getting a connection that is limited at times (but paying less for it), but am willing to do so because there is a specification of what those limits are, and I can live with those limits.

I *could* live with BT's current offering too, but I don't know if I could live with it tomorrow.

Risk management. Not such a simple science

In reply to a post by reddev86:

The only way I know how to bypass the shaping on Infinity is via VPN. Not bad if you already have VPN capability for other uses, but if you don't that's extra expense on top of your monthly costs.

I went with Plusnet for a few reasons. Though they do have a few cons to go with the pros as well.

Pros:

A: 120GB peak allowance - plenty for me, equates to 4GB a day, and most days im at work, all my downloading is done overnight anyway.

B: Honest about shaping - Unlike other ISPs with vague FUPs, Plusnet come clean with what you should expect from your connection, with regards to speed at certain times of the day via certain protocols.

C: The ability to disable shaping altogether - Something Infinity does not have, an extra £5 a month to Plusnet, and there is no shaping, end of. Even with the extra £5, it only takes the monthly fee up to £26.49 for 120GB peak usage (8am-midnight) and absolutely unlimited off-peak. I did close to 1TB last month off-peak and I didn't even have to try that hard.

D: Option of a Static IP - I'm not sure if Infinity has this option, but I didn't think so.

Cons:

A: The 120GB peak time allowance counts upload traffic as well, not a major problem for me, but for other people that upload lots, that could be a problem.

B: No 10Mbit upload option - for now you are stuck with the 2Mbit upload variant. Though they do have plans to provide the 10Mbit option in future, along with the 20Mbit option when it is released.

C: No IPv6 yet - again they have plans to provide it in future, it's in the trial stages, but it's not that important for me - but may be a problem for others.

you almost had me sold, until the 2mbit upload part. shame on that.

Do plusnet still have capacity issues so even with pro its full speed during peak?

Haven't experienced any capacity issues on Plusnet for a long time.

They are constantly increasing 20CN and 21CN capacity as and when it's required.

I get full speed 24/7.

ok thanks.

it seems my main issue is that all the providers want long tie ins.

I may have to use the distance selling act to get out of a contract if the first month is poor.

Edited by Chrysalis (Fri 16-Dec-11 13:38:05)

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

it seems my main issue is that all the providers want long tie ins.

I may have to use the distance selling act to get out of a contract if the first month is poor.

I think you will find that in effect the act does not apply once you are live. ISP-getout clauses and goodwill are more likely effective routes.

I think you right or rather the problem is more that it is unlikely I would have the service live within 7 days of agreeing the contract. It seems the act is weak in regard to service as the idea of it is to allow a consumer to back out of a purchase if it wasnt what it seems as they couldnt examine what they buying without face to face. To me services are the same, the only way to see how the service works is to actually sign up as things liek congestion, line quality etc. wont show until then.

It seems if I am right every single FTTC product in the market is long term only 12+ months. So whoever agrees to give me a 30 day get out clause gets my custom (at least initially).

That's because the Openreach mininum period is 12 months.