Comments on: Analysis of BitTorrent uTP congestion avoidance

By: George Ou

George Ou — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 05:41:12 +0000

Yes Rafi, I will continue to test (with actual usage) uTorrent, and will continue to monitor network jitter. I can report that nothing has changed (for the better), nor do I expect it to change because the design of uTP isn’t for addressing high jitter and bandwidth hogging. The application is designed to hog as much “idle” bandwidth (at the expense of other applications) as possible. The application isn’t designed to minimize jitter.

By: Rafi

Rafi — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 20:24:25 +0000

George,
Yes, I saw this article. And your suggestion to prioritize applications probably with some QoS mechanism is a valid one for whoever have the means for that (like proper router ) . Still, the ordinary user does not have/use that.

1. I’m sure you know that settings *cannot* remain defaults, but have to be set per your line’s max. upload (optionally with the internal setup guide)
2. I hope you are aware that since this beta (!) you’ve tested here (and even after the release of the final build #17920), there is an on-going effort to iron some bugs/issues, and release a 2.01 follow-up version. A new protocol is not easy to implement w/o tuning it in the real environment.
3. Your inputs here, as well as others (like my own bug-reports in the forums) will surly be taken into account in the upcoming release. If you did further tests for the current 2.01 beta- posting your finding can help them too.
If you believe the good intentions behind the uTP development (and I do) feedbacks can surly help. As I see it, it is pre-mature of you to judge by early beta releases, and we just have to wait for the next release or two to see if this attempt to improve was successful.

Hope you’ll find the time to test 2.01 when it’s out.

By: George Ou

George Ou — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 19:46:00 +0000

Rafi, they are all default settings.

The settings aren’t the problem. The application is designed this way and BitTorrent chose to be selfish rather than polite.
http://www.digitalsociety.org/2010/01/bittorrent-would-rather-be-selfish-than-friendly/

By: Rafi

Rafi — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 07:54:25 +0000

George, can you specify your exact uTorrent’s settings (changes to the defaults) ? Or did I just miss those .

BTW, it will be appropriate to repeat the test after the 2.0 release will be stabilized in the form of 2.01 (now in beta).

By: How not to do P2P « Procera Network's Blog

How not to do P2P « Procera Network's Blog — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 17:05:25 +0000

[...] always agree with the sentiments of the researchers (for instance, I quite agree with “http://www.digitalsociety.org/2009/11/analysis-of-bittorrent-utp-congestion-avoidance/” George Ou on BitTorrent – for [...]

By: mike

mike — Sun, 21 Feb 2010 02:39:03 +0000

using Utorrent and Netlimiter Pro 2 works fine, I did have to
degrade back to utorrent 1.8.3 as the 2.0 did bad for me

In NetLimiter Pro 2.0 you can limit any app. and use Grants
for important apps.

By: Digital Society » Blog Archive » Basics of packet switching network congestion

Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:51:13 +0000

[...] Figure 3 – uTorrent 2.0 download traffic causes massive jitter Source: Analysis of BitTorrent uTP congestion avoidance [...]

By: Digital Society » Blog Archive » What is true neutrality in the network?

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:44:02 +0000

[...] [...]

By: Digital Society » Blog Archive » Debunking the myth that prioritized networks are harmful

Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:39:12 +0000

[...] [...]

By: Digital Society » Blog Archive » Knapp is right, there are apps with special requirements

Fri, 06 Nov 2009 16:51:26 +0000

[...] the bandwidth and P2P gets the other 50% to prevent P2P from hogging over 90% of the traffic (and by design no less since BitTorrent feels entitled to as much idle bandwidth as they can grab), I don’t [...]