RE: utorrent

From: Ben Ebert <>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 14:23:11 -0700

The autoposter will handle what it can, it isn't working perfectly yet.
This was expected to happen eventually, there is no trivial plan B until
we do some research into the new client and the bt.ban_ratio field.
Some development will be necessary if it is even possible to continue to
interdict in this manner.


From: Ben Grodsky
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 2:18 PM
To: Jay Mairs; Ben Ebert
Subject: FW: utorrent
Importance: High

Randy will ask you VERY SOON, so I'm just trying to pre-empt a
shit-storm. Any plan B?
can Auto Poster handle MOST of the blow?


From: Tabish Hasan
Sent: Wed 09-May-07 14:15
To: qa
Cc: torrents
Subject: RE: utorrent

After more in-depth analysis...we've determined that the new version
DOES affect our interdiction in a negative way. They've added a new
"bt.ban_ratio" field that takes into consideration how many good pieces
a client has uploaded. On the older version, they would just kick any
peer that uploaded bad data 5+ times.


This post gives some more explanation about the bad ratio field:


We still see a lot of hash_check fails...but now the only peers getting
banned are ours. This also affects MediaSentry's interdicted torrents.
They are no longer effective on the newest version either.





From: Tabish Hasan
Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 6:45 PM
To: Randy Saaf; qa
Subject: RE: utorrent



We've tested this newest version (1.7 beta) before...but apparently
there was a new build released yesterday (build 1703) we'll check
that tomorrow morning against torrents in our interdiction system.





From: Randy Saaf
Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 6:42 PM
To: qa
Subject: utorrent


Can you test the new version of utorrent to see if it affects us?



Received on Fri Sep 14 2007 - 10:55:53 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun Sep 16 2007 - 22:19:46 BST