Why Does YouTube's throughput suck so bad?


Recommended Posts

REJECT/DROP 173.194.55.0/24

REJECT/DROP 206.111.0.0/16

(for the uninformed, /16 and /24 is not a range, but a subnet class) ie, 206.111.0.0 - 206.111.255.255 = /16)

Problem solved, was posted on reddit just this week. I did it myself and everything loads instantly now on my 85mbit FiOS line vs before laggy as ever. This affects all the feeds on youtube/vimeo, so all will be well. It can be confirmed by adding and removing with tests before after and then removed after again.

Time Warner and Verizon have this issue, no one is quite sure the absolute cause, but those servers your blocking are google and vimeo servers that most likely handle content throttling. When they are blocked you download directly from the source, ie; google data center.

Use caution as you are blocking a wide range of ip address locations. No one has reported any adverse effects yet.

Linux commands below; (Advanced Firewall on Windows Vista or higher can handle this also)

sudo ipfw add reject src-ip 173.194.55.0/24 in

sudo ipfw add reject src-ip 206.111.0.0/16 in

Source; http://www.reddit.co...50w8x?context=1

I would like to know how they came up with these subnets from their ISPs and what exactly is meant by the REJECT/DROP. This would helpful to those trying to figure out why their own YouTube browsing is slow on a different ISP.

Well real quick if you resolve

o-o---preferred---sn-mv-p5qe---v17---lscache1.c.youtube.com

You get 206.111.9.12, well thats what I got, which is just cname, etc. But yeah not sure how they determined to block the whole /16 block..

When resolving that I get 208.117.251.13. But still, it leaves too many questions for me. Where did you get that cname from? Who is to say that YouTube doesn't use other caches referred to by cname depending on location. It would seem it's far too difficult to find out YouTube's structure for providing videos to make one suggestion work uniformly. Hence, the method is imperative.

Its its quite possible the cache(s) reside on lots of different networks.. I would not block such networks unless you were having a specific issue with that specific cache, etc..

I would do your own analysis of where your pulling your youtube videos from.

The reddit link is the guy was doing experiments and posted what he found, not sure blocking it is the correct solution - but others seemed to have jumped on that plan. Does not mean its a fix for anyone having youtube issues.

  • Like 2

I have never ever ever ever EVER been able to stream video from YouTube at a decent pace, and I have... big surprise, Time Warner as my ISP. I've always known they were involved in the issue. I have 20 Mbps internet with them and no issue with any speed test ever, just actually playing the videos. Glad to hear people figuring out more info about the cache servers. I'll definitely have to try that when I get home. YouTube still streams like it's 1995 for me.

I have Time Warner Roadrunner and I was also having issues with YouTube buffering. I added the entry to my Windows Firewall and now it streams so fast and perfect like it should. I don't know why this works but it definitely does for me. It is so lame we have to do this just to get good YouTube speeds.

It's pathetic that ISPs are messing with the experience and screwing up people's ability to use the internet connection they paid for. Network caches should only ever be used if the improve performance, not as a way to reduce the ISP's running costs. And it's no surprise to see that American ISPs are responsible for the bulk of the issues, given the issues with broadband competition over there. There's no incentive to offer a better service if users don't have a decent alternative.

Not sure it works...I have Roadrunner 20/2 package. On my desktop, I made the change the change to Windows Firewall, I'm getting 10,000-20,000 kbps download on youtube. On my laptop, where I didn't make any changes to Windows Firewall, I'm getting roughly the same download speed on the same exact video at the same resolution...

From what I remember, youtube implemented small buffering within the last 2 years which means it will buffer a certain amount or percent of the video (not sure which or what the parameter is) and then as you get nearer to the end of that buffer point, load more data from youtube.

You think it's annoying that it does that, especially if you're on a flakey wireless connection but it actually does make sense, how many people on youtube are just browing random videos or stop listening/watching things part the way through? Saves YT a lot of resources and bandwidth to not stream the whole files to everyone if they're not gonna use it, plus it allows them to monitor and slow down connections when they detect people downloading videos en masse.

I wanted to add a bit of interesting information. On any YouTube video you can right click and show video info. This will display the speed at which you are downloading the video. I've gone to a few and some are maxing out my pipe but some more popular videos are throttled down to less than 1Mbps. This would seem to suggest that there is in fact a cache somewhere affecting me. What is the best way for me to determine from where I am downloading a particular video? I'm not too familiar with this level of investigation.

From what I remember, youtube implemented small buffering within the last 2 years which means it will buffer a certain amount or percent of the video (not sure which or what the parameter is) and then as you get nearer to the end of that buffer point, load more data from youtube.

You think it's annoying that it does that, especially if you're on a flakey wireless connection but it actually does make sense, how many people on youtube are just browing random videos or stop listening/watching things part the way through? Saves YT a lot of resources and bandwidth to not stream the whole files to everyone if they're not gonna use it, plus it allows them to monitor and slow down connections when they detect people downloading videos en masse.

There is more of a problem than simple buffering that people are having issue with. I have a 25Mbps connection. If I were streaming videos at that speed, I wouldn't care how little my buffer is. The problem is that either YouTube or ISPs are using caching servers which can't handle the load of their customers. It seems as though some people are finding success in ignoring certain IPs/subnets in which incompetent cache servers reside. That is where this conversation should be heading in my opinion: Helping find a method for each person to apply to their situation.

Someone linked to a good guide the other day, but I'm not able to find it at this time.

You need to go into your advanced firewall for windows, create a outbound rule, choose custom, all programs, all ports, tcp for protocol, enter address lines as 206.111.0.0/16 etc, and finish.

It should look like below for 206.111.0.0/16 in your advanced firewall if done right.

The 173 subnet class c is for vimeo if I read correctly, I just used google in the above example. And its 206.111 not 206.x

And IpTables wise, routers like the Actiontec supplied by FiOS allows for GUI Web Access for advanced filtering.

i think it needs to be an inbound rule, not an outbound, right?

i followed this guide yesterday that i found linked on the Reddit site

http://www.studyblog.net/2011/10/block-ip-address-or-ip-range-in-windows-server-2008-by-windows-firewall/

i can confirm that this fix works. I am doing the Youtube speed test right now, downloading their 720p test video. The site shows that my avg speed over the last month was 4Mbps. Right now it's downloading that video at 20-27Mbps.

Nope never had issue one with youtube bandwidth

Do you have a specific video your having issues with you can link too? Some of the major ISP use their own caching server for youtube, that could be your problem?

I would rightclick on a video and get the info, what speed are you getting. I would also again from rightclick on video to a speedtest - what does that show?

Virgin Media here in the UK use caching server for popular YouTube videos and its really really slow :(

i can confirm that this fix works. I am doing the Youtube speed test right now, downloading their 720p test video. The site shows that my avg speed over the last month was 4Mbps. Right now it's downloading that video at 20-27Mbps.

Yup, fix works for me as well. I was pulling my hair out today trying to figure this out. Was resorting to 240p! Using U-Verse here.

Well, the issue is back. Last for about an hour then I went to load another video in 720p and it only plays 5 seconds or so before it has to buffer again. What a PoS. I use youtube a lot for game mods, lets plays, etc and this is just annoying. Swear this was working fine not even 4 days ago.

edit: Yeah, I can't explain it. Went in and re-added the firewall rule and it wasn't getting above 360p without stopping. Went to do the youtube speed test and the damn thing loaded up fine. Went back to the original video I was trying to watch and its working fine again. Who knows.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!