cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

edonkey/emule problem NOT being worked on.

N/A

edonkey/emule problem NOT being worked on.

Apparently if you wait 5 days with the ticket system, you do eventually get an answer. Often you have to bat this back, as they havn't read the question but eventually answers that fill in the original question turn up. Some of them read like english is not their first language and sadly, the replies are not what I wanted to hear. The condensed information on this topic follows,

Quote
It is not an issues with the way this particular protocol is managed but rather a problem with the design of the software itself.

Edonkey/emule is extremely poorly written and desgined. 2Mbps traffic from edonkey has a network footprint of something like 8Mbps and is therefore managed more severely.


I note the use of the word managed, when I'm in my clean-to allowence, and therefore should not be being managed at all, but it seems all traffic is managed while the system is on, only the degree varies.

These numbers seem slightly odd to me, as I dont need 4 times the traffic going through my modem for a given amount of file downloaded, and if I didn't know better might have thought I was being fibbed to. Clearly though these seemingly normal and deceptivly complient TCP and UDP packets are like sponges and expand after they leave the ADSL system in a way no other aparently similar and aparently equally complient packets do. Now I thought 'network footprint' was a term used to describe the reach of wireless routers, and an internet search failed to yeild anything else, but overjoyed that in doing that search I was using some traffic going into a higher queue I requested clarification and the reply was,

Quote
I am aware that the program would have worked ok sans management. What my colleague was trying to say is that the "network footprint" (The amount of data overheads required to keep a program connected and running) is huge as the code is so poorly written in emule/donkey. This is why it runs slower on our network as our managment detects it as a huge overhead and manages accordingly.

This is not being worked on currently as the issue lies with badly written 3rd party software, control of which is out of our hands. As not everyone chooses this program, it is not commercially viable to re write our network protocols to make this one program run better.


So not everyone chooses to use eDonkey, or emule. Indeed some choose to use WinMX, ahh, but that also has the problem, as aparently does limewire and I'm guessing if it not commercially viable to fix one of these programs, it probably is even less commercially viable to fix all of them. The problem is the sharing program, not the new system. What we need is a sharing program thats also caring.

So there we have it, "clean-to" is the caring way to imply people arn't being managed, when they are, and a level of caring that plusnet have no intention of changing. It protects us both from 'badly written' '3rd party software'. I assume 1st party software would have to be a p2p client written by plusnet, and 2nd party software would be a company contracted by plusnet to include the same protocol in their programs. If only the makers of emule, edonkey, limewire, WinMX and probably many other sharing tools had known they would, in a few mere years, be incompatable with the plusnet system they could have waited and applied to use the new plusnet p2p protocol. Lets hope this careing sharing protocol is as kind to their system as packets containing http data are and we can all see the benifit.

Clearly plusnet must have good evidence that us naughty users are using 8Mbit of resorces for every 2Mbit we can push or pull through our modems, but I'm guessing this is not something they want to share with us and as careing customers we shouldn't ask.

I did also ask a related question which being so small and trivial kept getting missed in a ticket with other questions. I wanted to know why the upload/download ratio system which sees users being allocated practical p2p/ftp/usenet upload limits of just 800 bytes a second in Level 4 management (and 3.2K/sec in Level 2 management) was at all apropriate for the type of user they were throttling (p2p users, a 1:1 medium, ftp users anywhere from about 10:1 to 1:10 or USENET users). Incidentally the average premiere user by their own stats downloads about twice what they upload and the ratio they use is 1:8 for the caps, Upload to Download. So I raised a second ticket and after a mere 2 weeks of batting back have a nice shiny caring reply.

Quote
The 8:1 ratio which you would normally get on a 2mb connection is maintained when you are placed on a network management. The decision to keep this ratio has been made by our networks team but I am unable to pass on their exact reasons for this.


I needed a little more information than 'unable' so I asked them to pass it along to the networks department, and another nice shiny reply was winging my way,

Quote
We are unable to provide this information, the networks team or not a customer facing department and this questions will not be passed on. Please accept my appoligies for any inconvenience this causes.


I assume if the networks team are not a customer facing department then we must be facing their backsides but its not an apropriate comment for such a civilised ticket and I guess its nice shiny replies all round from a company that cares about its customers. Of course caring about the share price goes into the platinum queue, caring about the stockholders other needs goes into the gold queue, caring about the staff and making sure the network team are isolated from the consequences of their actions goes into the silver queue and caring about the customers goes into into the bronze queue, subject to caring limits (as subjectivly judged according to the caring footprint, and not by the actual amount of caring measured by the caring management system or the caring billing system or according to the sustainable caring policy), and exempted from having to fix any problems caused in the caring of anything in higher queues.

All in all I feel cared for, and I think plusnet should be aplauded for admitting there is a problem, and telling us straight they are going to do nothing. I'm sure I'm very neerly out of my caring allowence but I thought I'd post it here, as, well, its the caring thing, and some of you might care about this issue as much as I do.
31 REPLIES
Community Veteran
Posts: 2,322
Registered: 01-08-2007

edonkey/emule problem NOT being worked on.

I cant go into detail, because A I cant remember fully, and B, it was a little over my head, but, at a meeting with Plusnet, several of us actually saw first hand network utilisation by protocol/application graphs.

Looking at the P2P one showed that indeed does account for a massive, (read almost all) slice of the bandwidth pie. When this was broken down into application, it could be seen that in particular emule/donkey was like some kind of leech, litterally swallowing up almost everything available, even squeezing other P2P apps slice. It was quite a good to be able to actually view the raw figures, and certainly put a lot of peoples minds at rest regarding why emule/donkey was being managed heavily.
LiamM
Grafter
Posts: 5,636
Registered: 12-08-2007

edonkey/emule problem NOT being worked on.

Replies removed as discussed content was against the forum rules.
N/A

edonkey/emule problem NOT being worked on.

chesterfield,

I can see why people might fall for that, and it directly contradicts plusnets replies which indicate users are too few for it to be worth them bothering with, but thats a good reason to limit total use, not prevent the application from functioning even for light users during peak hours. I have a 1M line, I can upload at 30K/sec on a good day, if I'm a light user it shouldnt matter if I want to saturate my bandwidth with http, or ftp or p2p, edonkey or not.

Its a bit like bringing up the statistic that most murders occur within families, and deciding that preventing people from marrying is the solution.

Either plusnet have bandwidth allocated for users below the clean-to limit, or they don't. Pretending they do, telling them they can use as much as they like and at the same time crippling the applications they would want to spend it on is not acceptable behaviour.

Thankyou for bringing this information to the thread though. It helps to know plusnet know.
Plusnet Staff
Plusnet Staff
Posts: 12,169
Thanks: 18
Fixes: 1
Registered: 04-04-2007

edonkey/emule problem NOT being worked on.

Hi,

The big problem with emule/donkey is that it's a very poorly designed protocol. No matter what speed your connection is it assumes you have an 8Mbps connection and will try and pull down 8Mbps of downloads. Without any kind of management on the network that 8Mbps would travel across our central pipes and only get rate limited at the exchange where your line speed is set. So for a 1Mbps line there'd be 7Mbps of discarded data that never reaches you travelling through our network and across our central pipes.

That's something that can't be allowed to happen, that 7Mbps could be used by all the customers instead of just going to waste, so we'll rate limit per customer (set at account speed) before the central pipes so they aren't carrying traffic that won't get to you. One of the side effects is that the poor design of the protocol will cause more than 7Mbps to get dropped hence why speeds aren't at full speed.
Community Veteran
Posts: 2,322
Registered: 01-08-2007

edonkey/emule problem NOT being worked on.

Ahh thats it, its all coming back now. It sends out requests to other peers for more data than it can actually handle so while the person at home gets a fully saturated 2mb connection, PN are actually using 8mb internally to do it.

I got fed up with P2P at home, especially anything that is riddled with spyware.
N/A

edonkey/emule problem NOT being worked on.

plenty of options to install emule without spyware
Community Veteran
Posts: 2,322
Registered: 01-08-2007

edonkey/emule problem NOT being worked on.

To be honest I just coulnt be hastled with the installation or hacking etc to get round all the spyware rubbish. Plus I always found emule/donkey was just full of porn, rather than anything useful.

It was a couple of years ago that I last used emule though so it may have changed. Ive been a bit torrent or MIRC user since. But have now given those up too - if I do want anything via P2P, Ill download the torrent at home, and use it here at work where I get 2mb instead of 1mb at home. This meant I could drop down to BB+ and save myself a few quid.
N/A

edonkey/emule problem NOT being worked on.

Seams to me that edonkey is definately one to avoid then, mind you it also explains my bad expierence when using it in the fact that the moment it begins to download anything when I was with my last ISP I found it choked the link and paket loss skyrocketed, having said that if it was not managed like it is with plus.net and it was just the exchange throttling to line speed then it would be undescriminatory just would loose packets which came in 2 fast reguardless of type meaning that most things would no longer work properly at the same time as it was maxing out, in short this is a really useless protocol.

Go for something like bit torrent at least it is smart enough to only request data at the maximum of the rate you specify rarther than choking you and everyone else happerning to share the same central off the net with useless data you will never be capable of recieving.
passer
Grafter
Posts: 381
Registered: 06-04-2007

edonkey/emule problem NOT being worked on.

@dtomlinson
Hello Dave -
So, would PlusNet be so good as to post a list - by name - of the P2P clients which they have determined are to be unacceptable to their business model? Pretty please? I don't mean a list of the types of traffic, I mean real names like Limewire, Emule, eDonkey, Azureus, WinMx, whatever. As they have managed to code them into the management systems, such a list clearly exists. It would save so much anguish within the forums if the answer was on the front page of the product descriptions. Look - I'll show you how:

Our ADSL products are not designed for use with certain Peer To Peer application clients, and users are likely to experience poor performance from them. Other ISPs may provide more suitable ADSL packages if users wish to run these programs. The affected programs currently include:
Alpha
Beta
Gamma
Delta
This list is subject to change.


Shouldn't be difficult, and it doesn't have to be definitive, but you could just include the ones you've already earmarked for exclusion, and update it if it became necessary.
N/A

edonkey/emule problem NOT being worked on.

These are not manually coded in this way, just a system works it out automatically, the system sees 8Mbps of traffic using the same protocol comming through the network all bound inevitably for the same ADSL user which is impossible to actually deliver as the end users DSL line can't take it so will throttle back on the packets to that port/protocol to prevent this alot harder than it would on one which is following the simple rules of do not request more data than you can handle which is how these things should work.
passer
Grafter
Posts: 381
Registered: 06-04-2007

edonkey/emule problem NOT being worked on.

So the applications are basically designed to be greedy, which makes sense given what they are, and the Ellacoya detects this and slows down the delivery rate to suit the available bandwidth capacity, which means slowing it to one quarter the actual capacity, as the application will continue to request four times as much as it can accept. Is that right? Though wouldn't that imply that I should achieve the speeds I used to get on my 512 line?

If so, might I be better to set my application speed-setting to 128 or something, as I'll be less likely to come to the attention of the Ellacoya, and will thus avoid the capping?

Lost - one plot. Will finder please return to brandon2, at the above address. :?
gregd
Grafter
Posts: 96
Registered: 27-08-2007

edonkey/emule problem NOT being worked on.

No wonder emule has been bringing my web browsing to a halt... its not my router at all.

Has it been banned across the entire network of PN? Id like to know because I have been a customer with you for 2 yrs + and i know for certain im being restricted from using it when im on a business account.

Also again suprisingly azureus jumps from 2Kb/s to 40Kb/s as soon as I hit midnight.

Your service is becoming more and more restricted and im not even on a home account. I have assigned a ticket (ticket number 18640526) if anyone can investigate this issue and come up with a solution please.
N/A

edonkey/emule problem NOT being worked on.

dtomlinson,

I'm sorry, but thats just as smelly and brown as the other lie's plusnet has been trying to get us to swallow on this issue. This tack, of course is designed to get us to say 'I'm sorry, I didnt know I was abusing the system, please forgive us oh mighty plusnet and we will not use these evil programs ever again".

Aside from the fact I never actually come close to saturating my downloads, in fact the most Ive ever seen would be about 60K/sec, and thus your whole 8Mbit argument goes out of the window for the very minimum of me personally, p2p by its nature is a 1:1 protocol, for every byte downloaded, another peer has to upload it, and the programs are designed to limit leechers. The vast majority of users thus generally average as download little more than they upload, 30K/sec at the very maximum while the program is running, and in my case rather less than the 12K/sec my copy of emule was previously set to, and previously to traffic management maintained very accuratly.

Now if other users were REALLY using 8Mbit on 2Mbit lines, then that is what you should be *measuring* and applying the rules to. Because I am 100% certain I am not. You made a mistake, you made the lie far too obvious.

I will accept that the programs written for the protocol can use the bandwidth agressivly - up to line speed if so set and the other peers are complient, which they are rarely for anything other than your uploads. but in clean-to this is exactly what you are telling us we can do, and then not providing.

An overview, and considerable detail of this very well designed p2p protocol can be found here,

http://www.cs.huji.ac.il/labs/danss/presentations/emule.pdf

Any furthur statements implying ed2k users, emule users, WinMX users, Limewire etc are abusing the system, or very badly programed should be backed up with evidence please or I will continue to assume that these problems are a result of plusnets own implimentation of protocol limiting that unlike bittorrent/ftp/usenet/http lets call them 'working' protocols was not provided with the hardware. Something backed up by Ellacoya networks sales literature.


gregd,

You may find you have exceeded the management levels on your account for this month. This is not a 'problem' as you arn't breaking any rules so long as you stay below the SUP levels, which I'll freely admit I have no clue about for buisness accounts, but you may find yourself 'managed' for a lot of protocols. Bittorrent when I did one test was not being limited during clean-to. If emule is affecting web browsing I sugguest you set upload and download limits below the line speeds.
N/A

edonkey/emule problem NOT being worked on.

Quote
I never actually come close to saturating my downloads, in fact the most Ive ever seen would be about 60K/sec, and thus your whole 8Mbit argument goes out of the window


i have got to agree, on emule the connection is never maxed out, if you are trying to get an uncommon file how can it be? and in the preferences you can set your connection speed and set your download limit, so whats all that about?

Dave, would you please explain in a little more detail what you ment about emule taking up constant 8Mb traffic, i don't quite understand.
i am not going to accuse you of lying, but is it possible you have made a mistake?