Am Di, den 11.11.2003 schrieb Rodolfo J. Paiz um 23:43: > > Joyfully bursting your bubble here: it took me somewhere between 3 and 4 > hours to get them with BitTorrent, and the top speed was well over 400 > KBps. I had 3-4 Mbps of bandwidth available, and you have about 1 Mbps. > Also remember that I downloaded less than 24 hours after release, while you > are doing so more than a week later after traffic has decreased somewhat. I have been downloading on the 6 th of November... Maybe I should have added, that the mirror is just round the corner (like 3 miles away), nevertheless the traffic goes long way over Hannover an back again... > So what's your point? You stats mean absolutely... nothing. My points were: 1. Use a mirror the is close to you, no need to download from somewhere in the pacific. 2. Do not use a busy server. Do not use download.fedora.redhat.com. The server I used is not listed on the fedora website, only listed at redhat.com as rh9 mirror. So I suggest: 3. Search your own favorite mirror. There are lots or not listed servers. 4. My results were over a 100% of available bandwidth: The "official" limit is 768KB, but some ISPs configure the line to 832 for overhead etc. My top speed was even above 832, it was ~ 840KB. > > [snip] > even at 100% efficiency and 100% saturation which > is impossible I think this /is/ 100% efficiency. I have been surfing and downloading on another machine on the same line. I can hardly imagine bittorent can beat this. > And that is > bandwidth that most people on Earth still do not have. > Of course not most of the people, but DSL is very popular in Germany. For most internet users I know ~ 768KB ist the standard :-) > Neither BitTorrent nor FTP are perfect solutions; there are times when > either one is better. Do not expect there to be, and do not promote, the > mentally-myopic view of "there is one way which is better" since that is > almost always wrong. Ok, you are right here. Christoph
