Smart Upload speed limiting

Archived discussion about features (predating the use of Bugzilla as a bug and feature tracker)

Moderator: Moderators

Locked
DTFT
Posts: 2
Joined: 2003-03-12 08:22

Smart Upload speed limiting

Post by DTFT » 2003-06-03 02:45

Hi All!

I got an idea of a feature that will limit the upload speed with out abusing it. The idea is simple, let the user manually define maximum upload speed while the DC++ will automaticly set the maximum download speed for twice as much. The any Leech a$$ that will set the U/l to 100b/s will get 200b/s of D/l , while good falks like me, those who have slow cable
will be able to limit the U/L to something reasonable that will no lay a waste to their D/l at the same time.

Why I think it is needed, becaus eI got cable con. and I got 500Kb/s D/l OR 96Kb/s U/l connection, while I share plenty of good stuff ppl D/l from me at some 10KB/s my D/l speed drops to a pathetic 3-4KB/s and less...
And since I'm almost constantly being D/led from it takes me a straigh 3-4 days to get some 700MB file.
Notice, the only thing I expect is to at least get the same speed of D/L as I offer to others, seems like a reasonable request to me.

So what do you think? Any chance of getting it in the next version?
---
" I know what's best for you."

Charalambos
Posts: 84
Joined: 2003-05-02 06:30

Re: Smart Upload speed limiting

Post by Charalambos » 2003-06-03 03:03

DTFT wrote: let the user manually define maximum upload speed while the DC++ will automaticly set the maximum download speed for twice as much.
So if someone has a 512/128 connection, he is then only able to dowload at max with 256?

I think many users have a connection where upstream is less than half of downstream.

By the way, the feature of limiting the upload bandwidth is already implemented in some modified dc++ clients as bcdc or dc++k.
You can only set it to a defined min value (i dont know exactly how many percent of your actual upstream, but i guess only something in the region of 70 or 80 % or somesuch).
There is no pleasure in having nothing to do; the fun is in having lots to do and not doing it.
-Mary Wilson Little

DTFT
Posts: 2
Joined: 2003-03-12 08:22

Post by DTFT » 2003-06-03 04:20

Then let it be about the x4 of U/L , the number's not an issue, the idiea is.

I'd get the modified DC++, the question is how much it's welcome at the hubs, I wouldn't like to get kicked for the "faulty clent"
---
" I know what's best for you."

cyberal
Posts: 360
Joined: 2003-05-16 05:42

Reserve UL speed to downloads

Post by cyberal » 2003-06-03 13:09

I think that "download speed is twice the upload speed"-idea is stupid... will never work! The best way to solve the "uploads slows down downloads"-problem would be if one could reserve, say 5 kB, of upload speed for the downloads! No cap settings, no cap tags, no nothing... just make dc++ "take" 5kB of the upload (no matter the bandwidth) and "lock" those 5kB to the downloads! I have no idea if this is even possible, but it sure would be good!
http://whyrar.omfg.se - Guide to RAR and DC behaviour!
http://bodstrom.omfg.se - Bodströmsamhället, Länksamling om hoten mot vår personliga integritet

Gratch06
Posts: 141
Joined: 2003-05-25 01:48
Location: USA

Post by Gratch06 » 2003-06-03 14:42

just make dc++ "take" 5kB of the upload (no matter the bandwidth) and "lock" those 5kB to the downloads!
I think this is a great idea. Everyone on modems or other connections with slow uploads can now choose (or be forced) to chop 5K/s off of their uploads, leaving...let's see...0 Kb/s upload availability! What a great way to make leeches and prohibit people on slow connections from contributing! And people do lie about connection speeds, so setting it to only apply to people who choose such and such a connection speed wouldn't work either. There are perfectly valid arguments for upload limiters, but I think it's been discussed repeatedly (search upload limiter) and it will not end up in the main DC++ app.

My opinion on this is that if you need something with an upload limiter, download one of the other clients available that has it included (just do a search on this board for them).

- Gratch

Nazo
Posts: 68
Joined: 2003-04-03 14:35

Post by Nazo » 2003-06-03 15:07

Hrm. As a bit of a modification of the idea I had in another thread a bit down, how about storing an average of a large number of your total uploads (it wouldn't be able to kick in until you reach a large number or else it would totally mess things up) then it just figured out some really small number based on that average of upload. Then it doesn't matter what the person claims their connection speed is, only how fast it uploads in practice. I don't know exactly how much you have to take off the top to fix downloads on those connections, but I figure if 5KB/s out of 96KB/s is sufficient, then possibly all you need would be a number like 5%. Also, I didn't say it clearly before, but, it should be based on your total upload speeds, not on your single upload speeds, so that even a person who has 999 slots open all the time so that the upload at 1KB/s to everyone, it would still see their full 999KB/s upload (that is, if everyone got exactly 1, but you get the idea.) Just like with the other idea I had, the principle abuse would be if people modify the average number (which I though should be encrypted to decrease the amount of that, but even if they did they'd have to keep modifying it -- oh, and if they tried to make the file readonly so it couldn't write the change, it would detect that on startup and disable the feature completely) and of course they could just modify the client, but that's already being done as you said up there, so you just can't really worry about that as there's just nothing you can do to stop them.

It occurs to me that this averaging system might be useful for other things as well. One thing that occurs to me just off the top of my head is that you could use it to force users to have a decent number of slots based on their bandwidth (so real T3 users are ok with a lot, but modem users shouldn't be allowed to set more than a bare minimum for getting into one hub, and I don't mean limiting them to just one or something, it would be reasonable like maybe 3.)

GargoyleMT
DC++ Contributor
Posts: 3212
Joined: 2003-01-07 21:46
Location: .pa.us

Post by GargoyleMT » 2003-06-04 20:47

Got ideas for making bandwidth limiting non-abusable? Show me the code

There are some novel ideas for automating caps. My code works wonderfully for me, and I even tested it at up to 100mbit speeds. And it's in my mini-mod client. You know what I do in it? I trust the user. Upload limiting is not a one-size-fits-all situation.

If you want to try to reward those who upload, delve into the excellent ratings system thread and start coding. :)

Nazo
Posts: 68
Joined: 2003-04-03 14:35

Post by Nazo » 2003-06-05 19:44

I'm sorry, I'm not an expert coder. If I were, I'd just make it myself and then present my idea and code as something that I thought should be integrated into DC++. I did catch one bit of an issue when thinking about that though. If you are limiting the uploads, it will lower the average, so you have to sort of add back in the amount that you are limiting by into the averaging, which isn't 100% accurate. Maybe a better way can be found, but that probably wouldn't be too bad if you add in a little tolerance or something. If the percentage you take off the top is small enough, it should be fine to just add that amount back in since the variance wouldn't be that much really.

Oh, and as for trusting the user. If people really felt they could just do that, there'd be an upload limiter where you can just enter the number to limit by with any number that they feel like putting in there. Do you honestly think that all the leechers out there are going to put a number higher than the absolute minimum that it allows you to enter, or, if you trust everyone so much that there's no minum, 1B/s will be what all those leechers put in. If the user were trusted, DC++ would already have that option as it's not exactly so terribly complicated that they can't get it since they can just see how to do it from the people who have modified this client without even having to figure out how to do it the hard way if they didn't want to, though I suspect the people working on DC++ wouldn't really have to do that.

Nazo
Posts: 68
Joined: 2003-04-03 14:35

Post by Nazo » 2003-06-05 19:46

Oh, and it would only have to add that amount back in when it actually hits the limit. Every upload before that limit is reached wouldn't have any amount added to it in the average, so would be completely accurate.

Locked