High Upload Anomaly

[Rigel]

I don't know if this is normal or not, but I just downloaded a movie (yes, I share all my media files) and the download took about 5 seconds. One of the uploaders had a 2000kbps upload rate (the other one had about a rate of 10kbps). The most anyone can upload from me is about 100 kbps, and I have cable. How can this anomaly occur? Do our connections have to match exactly or does the uploader have to have the filesharing power of Deep Blue? I'm really out of my league here and frankly am confused.

[Shinigami_[R.I.P.]]

That person must had had a connection higher that CABLE, or had a system completely devoted to uploading. You shouldn't worry too much. The movie does work right? If it does, don't worry. :D

[The Great Dude]

Ok, it took you 5 seconds to download a movie? How can you do that with cable? :blink:

[Shinigami_[R.I.P.]]

oh, didn't notice he had cable... odd now... :huh:

[Rigel]

Yes, I have Knology cable. My maximum bandwidth is set to unlimited, though. I thought I read somewhere that cable has some sort of hardware bandwidth limit, however...

[saurabh]

The uploader and you might have a common ISP and hence on the same network.

[kAb]

why is so amazing that he has cable? :huh:

[The Great Dude]

he said he downloaded a movie in 5 seconds.

[Shinigami_[R.I.P.]]

Wait, he could have. If the movie was a reasonable size like maybe under...3 megs... I dunno :unsure: :P

[The Great Dude]

Originally posted by Shinigami@12 March 2003 - 19:41
Wait, he could have. If the movie was a reasonable size like maybe under...3 megs... I dunno :unsure: :P
That would be the shortest movie ever. :P

[Wolfmight]

How big is it? Cable dont download at 2000kbytes/s.. :huh:

[Rigel]

30 min movie, and about 100 megs

[TIDE-HSV]

Well, since Knology is available to me, maybe I should reconsider it. :) Do YOU have any files I want??? :)

[Nobody1234]

Are you on a local network? Were you sharing that file yourself before you downloaded it?

[RPerry]

Nobody1234 has a valid point, I would bet on you having two of the same file ;) Unless its possible of having speed that high on cable, which I never have heard of either :huh:

[Icey]

wat ever connection he got, i want it :D :P

[Switeck]

There's almost certainly a misprint/miscalculation somewhere in this report of superfast download rates...

The poster said 2,000kbps -- which if he meant 2,000 kilobits/sec is quite possible with some cablemodem connections, although mine maxes out around 1,600-1,900kilobits/sec.

But 2,000 kilobits/sec is only about 250 KB/sec -- and 5 seconds of that is about 1 MB. (not 100 MB, just 1...)

However, if the poster saw 2,000 Kb/s inside Kazaa Lite++ -- then I am a little skeptical, because that's 2,000 KiloBytes/sec (about 2 MB/sec or 16 Mbps). That would almost certainly HAVE to come from someone on the same cable node of the same ISP -- and even still that's unlikely...

Some Cablemodems, if uncapped, are capable of speeds as high as 30 Mbps -- but they usually are connected to the computer through a USB v1.1 (11 Mbps max) or 10 Mbps ethernet LAN connector. 16 Mbps (2,000 Kb/s) is considerably faster than such connectors can handle.

Even *IF* the reported speeds are accurate, the filesize is impossible -- because 5 seconds at 2,000 KiloBytes/sec is only about 10 MB.

[Icey]

i just read in the paper today.. the fastest internet speed record


we were able to send 4 dvd's worth of data 7,000 miles in under 1min WOW! :o


so your looking at 40-60gb's a minute (my whole hard drive in 1 min!! :o

[Nobody1234]

In any case if he did get that kind of speed, the only way is if it was local. Not though his cable.

[-=M3th0d=-]

I doubt you could even get that on a local network, i know i dont on my uni network, the fastest ive ever got on my local is 789kb/s.

[Nobody1234]

Network cards are 10Mbps to 100Mbps. I bet a lot of you have seen 10/100Mbps specified cards. So if he was talking about 2000KBps in kazaa thats 2000x8= 16,000kbps or 16 Mbps.

Still it must have been more than 5 seconds.
30 min movie, and about 100 megs 5x16= 80 mbits. So really it works out to more like 50 seconds at that speed to download 100MBs. 50x16=800 mbits or 100 mbytes.

[Icey]

either this guy is lying.. or he is mistaken. no way could these sort of speeds b possilbe over kazaa

[Nobody1234]

It's possible over kazaa but only if it's in his local network or from himself.

[Icey]

i don't think u r able to download from urself

[Nobody1234]

You can download from yourself if you meet the right conditions.

@Rigel, Are you on a local area network? What version of Kazaa(lite) are you talking about?
If you are on a network does any of the other computers have Kazaa?

I find this topic quite entertaining. :D :lol:

[RPerry]

Originally posted by Nobody1234@13 March 2003 - 15:36
You can download from yourself if you meet the right conditions.

@Rigel, Are you on a local area network? What version of Kazaa(lite) are you talking about?
If you are on a network does any of the other computers have Kazaa?

I find this topic quite entertaining. :D :lol:
wasn't this almost the basis on which Rocko's PL cheater was created? It wouldn't duplicate the file, but it would appear to be downloading at a torid pace :huh:

[Icey]

Originally posted by RPerry+13 March 2003 - 21:39--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (RPerry @ 13 March 2003 - 21:39)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Nobody1234@13 March 2003 - 15:36
You can download from yourself if you meet the right conditions.

@Rigel, Are you on a local area network? What version of Kazaa(lite) are you talking about?
If you are on a network does any of the other computers have Kazaa?

I find this topic quite entertaining. :D&nbsp; :lol:
wasn&#39;t this almost the basis on which Rocko&#39;s PL cheater was created? It wouldn&#39;t duplicate the file, but it would appear to be downloading at a torid pace :huh: [/b][/quote]
yea, but i can&#39;t see the guy downloading a movie from himself.. wats the point? lol

[RPerry]

Not saying he did it on purpose, seems like I also did the same thing once, not realizing I already had the file. Download took off like a bat out of hell, and with me on 56k, i was trying to figure out what happened. This seems like the possible cause of what he saw, you don&#39;t really think he got that kind of speed out of cable, do you?

[Icey]

it seems the only reasonable answer..

[TIDE-HSV]

It&#39;s still not the answer. As Switeck pointed out above, there&#39;s the problem of the USB 1.1/Ethernet 10 (if that&#39;s what he had) limitations. In my case, my machines are hooked up to Ethernet 100/10, so, theoretically, I could DL from myself at a rate that high. However, I&#39;m almost certain that the cable modem is USB 1.1 - although all my ports are USB 2 (backwards compatible). Oops&#33; I checked the modem, which is new, and it does have Ethernet, rather than USB, like my old one. I guess, theoretically, I could DL that fast from myself. :lol: That is, if I wanted to.

[J'Pol]

Feck sake, he&#39;s having a laugh. I would bet student, probably physics.

Seeing what pi&#036;h explanations you can come up with. He&#39;s downloading 20MB per second. Through a modem.

Copy a 100Mb file from one partition on your hard drive to another. Tell me how you get on.

[Icey]

Originally posted by JmiF@13 March 2003 - 23:25
Feck sake, he&#39;s having a laugh. I would bet student, probably physics.

Seeing what pi&#036;h explanations you can come up with. He&#39;s downloading 20MB per second. Through a modem.

Copy a 100Mb file from one partition on your hard drive to another. Tell me how you get on.
as i said b4.. he must me having a laugh

[Icey]

Originally posted by TIDE-HSV@13 March 2003 - 22:40
It&#39;s still not the answer. As Switeck pointed out above, there&#39;s the problem of the USB 1.1/Ethernet 10 (if that&#39;s what he had) limitations. In my case, my machines are hooked up to Ethernet 100/10, so, theoretically, I could DL from myself at a rate that high. However, I&#39;m almost certain that the cable modem is USB 1.1 - although all my ports are USB 2 (backwards compatible). Oops&#33; I checked the modem, which is new, and it does have Ethernet, rather than USB, like my old one. I guess, theoretically, I could DL that fast from myself. :lol: That is, if I wanted to.
but y would u ?? lol :P

[TIDE-HSV]

Hey Jim, did you get an email from me a couple of days ago?

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by TIDE-HSV@13 March 2003 - 23:34
Hey Jim, did you get an email from me a couple of days ago?
Yes, I replied to it mate, or at least I thought I did. Did you not receive it. I will check the sent mail and re-send.

[artmaster88]

in reality it&#39;s all an illusion.
OR
he was dreaming and had a dream of super fast downloads, and that made him so horny that he shot his whole load over his screen, so then when he was typing he couldn&#39;t see the text properly and then even exaggerated, so there&#39;s a typing mistake and exaggeration in the game.
i should stop going on the forum after a party.

Greetz,
KraZaka

[TIDE-HSV]

Got it this time. Thanks.

[TIDE-HSV]

Geben wem keine Chance? Und warum??

[Nobody1234]

Originally posted by TIDE-HSV@13 March 2003 - 16:40
It&#39;s still not the answer. As Switeck pointed out above, there&#39;s the problem of the USB 1.1/Ethernet 10 (if that&#39;s what he had) limitations. In my case, my machines are hooked up to Ethernet 100/10, so, theoretically, I could DL from myself at a rate that high. However, I&#39;m almost certain that the cable modem is USB 1.1 - although all my ports are USB 2 (backwards compatible). Oops&#33; I checked the modem, which is new, and it does have Ethernet, rather than USB, like my old one. I guess, theoretically, I could DL that fast from myself. :lol: That is, if I wanted to.
Why do you think he has USB 1.1/Ethernet 10 ? He never said that. :D

Edit: to remove signature

[TIDE-HSV]

I didn&#39;t say that. I just quoted Switeck. He just pointed out that, if he were using either of those two standards - most people still do - that it would place the transfer even further outside the realm of the possible. And this was examining the possibility that he may have been, unknowingly, DLing from himself.

[Switeck]

Originally posted by Nobody1234+13 March 2003 - 18:24--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Nobody1234 @ 13 March 2003 - 18:24)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--TIDE-HSV@13 March 2003 - 16:40
As Switeck pointed out above, there&#39;s the problem of the USB 1.1/Ethernet 10 (if that&#39;s what he had) limitations.Why do you think he has USB 1.1/Ethernet 10 ? He never said that. :D[/b][/quote]I think his cablemodem connection connects to his computer via USB v1.1 or 10Mbps ethernet LAN because USB v2.0/100Mbps cablemodems are only just now appearing on the market. The few examples that have been around for awhile are still expensive.

[TIDE-HSV]

As I said, my new modem connects via Ethernet. My router/firewall is 100/10, and so are the NICa, but the modem may be only 10.

[Nobody1234]

I think his cablemodem connection connects to his computer via USB v1.1 or 10Mbps ethernet LAN because USB v2.0/100Mbps cablemodems are only just now appearing on the market. The few examples that have been around for awhile are still expensive.

My setup has an external ADSL modem connected via my 10/100Mbps LAN card. I have had this for quite some time now so they are not new.


I didn&#39;t say that. I just quoted Switeck. He just pointed out that, if he were using either of those two standards - most people still do - that it would place the transfer even further outside the realm of the possible. And this was examining the possibility that he may have been, unknowingly, DLing from himself.

If he is downloading from himself or within his local network he is not limited by his modem in any way. The transfer is happening on his side of the modem via his internal network and does not have to pass though the modem.

[TIDE-HSV]

Even if he&#39;s not a SuperNode? You mean you think the transfer is happening locally on his hard drive? Detail the mechanics of that.

[Nobody1234]

You&#39;re getting warmer. :D

[TIDE-HSV]

I&#39;m over 60 - too old for games.

[Switeck]

Originally posted by Nobody1234@13 March 2003 - 21:23
My setup has an external ADSL modem connected via my 10/100Mbps LAN card. I have had this for quite some time now so they are not new.That does not tell me whether the ADSL&#39;s LAN card can run at 100Mbps or not... or even if it matters, because if ADSL maxes out at 8Mbps download speeds it certainly cannot manage 2 MB/sec OR much need a LAN card faster than 10Mbps.

[TIDE-HSV]

In any event, the program, as I understand it, searches the FastTrack network, which means that the connection will be through a Super Node, not on the local machine. Therefore, the latency alone would prevent such speeds. I&#39;m still open to anyone, who knows what he&#39;s talking about, to explain why the program would not follow its normal protocol.

[Rigel]

I should have closed this up long ago. As I received the first responses to my post, I checked to see the integrity of the file. It turns out I had downloaded an episode from the wrong season. So most of the posts are right on target when they say I had a duplicate file. When I realized this, however, my computer did one of those neat little tricks where it shuts off for no reason. After calling tech support for hours, I finally had the problem fixed, but I forgot all about this post and let it run rampant. However, I have since (mistakenly) done this kind of thing again and download times were normal. I run all of the programs that continually search for new downloads, so I&#39;m wondering why I didn&#39;t "download off of myself" this time. Anyway, sorry to waste your time. BTW, I have 10/100 Ethernet Card, if anyone&#39;s still wondering.

For the record, my projected download speed was 2000 KiloBYTES/sec.

[TIDE-HSV]

It&#39;s not the fact that you DLed from yourself; I think that&#39;s a given at this point. The mechanics of how it happened, however, still interest me. Are you functioning as a Super Node? If you are, then that may be the answer.

[Rigel]

Surprisingly, no. I have confirmed that the option box "Do not function as a SuperNode" is checked, and always has been (I don&#39;t touch my settings).

[TIDE-HSV]

Interesting. If you had ever checked the block, unchecking it doesn&#39;t seem to remove one, until it&#39;s scrubbed out of the registry. I can&#39;t explain it in the context of how KL is designed to work. By the time the program has begun to search FastTrack, the latency alone would seem to make that sort of speed impossible, even if you were DLing from your own folder. I guess it&#39;ll just stay an anomaly.