Gnutella Forums

Gnutella Forums (https://www.gnutellaforums.com/)
-   General Gnutella / Gnutella Network Discussion (https://www.gnutellaforums.com/general-gnutella-gnutella-network-discussion/)
-   -   eD2k + G1? Today is possible? Why not? (https://www.gnutellaforums.com/general-gnutella-gnutella-network-discussion/104471-ed2k-g1-today-possible-why-not.html)

falcogiallo August 6th, 2020 07:13 AM

eD2k + G1? Today is possible? Why not?
 
Translation by Google.
Hello everyone
It was a long time since I entered this forum.
I want to ask you to consider some aspects relating, but not limited to, the functionality of G1 clients and changes in the use of p2p networks by users.
In recent years, number of users on p2p networks has dropped considerably, this has also affected very important networks such as ed2k and torrents, but to a greater extent it has affected less widespread networks such as G1 and Direct Connect.

Taking into account these aspects that I think are incontrovertible, and taking into account the increase in available bandwidth thanks to the fiber that has increased the speed of all networks including those that seemed to be the slowest such as eDonkey (eMule), I arrived at these conclusions:

1) EMule has become a fast client, thanks to the fiber you can reach remarkable speeds and you can quickly download everything you want.
On eMule there is everything, it is the network with the highest number of files shared perpetually, even the rarest.
Despite the drop in users, a very important drop in recent years, those who are left are the true loyalists of the program and among them there are many Big Sharers with over 30,000 files shared per user!
The fact that there are fewer users (many were only leechers) means that there are shorter queues, but I repeat, fiber speed allows them to be easily overcome compared to past years.

2) On G1 network I found discouragement, there is nothing left ...
Generally If you find any files it is thanks to some Shareaza user sharing on ed2k + G1.
G1 blamed heavily on the drop in users, much more heavily than Torrent and Ed2k.
I also found it very difficult to connect as a leaf to network.
I believe that many users disable the ultra-node mode to save resources on internet bandwidth, but now with fiber it is possible to sustain this traffic very well!
On this you should write something on homepage, a plea, "pls not disable the ability to connect as an ultranode to support the network".
You should raise awareness among users to collaborate to make network work well by explaining its benefits for everyone.
Shareaza users should also be sensitized and should enable ability to connect as an ultranode to G1 network.

In conclusion, if change I have talked about is real, why not bring about a network change that is advantageous for both networks in future?
For example, KAD (serverless) network in eMule is obsolete, it allows the share of 3000 files max, while G1 (serverless) network is extremely more efficient!

At this point why not implement eDonkey network in WireShare and gtk-gnutella instead of torrent and G2 and give a strong boost and advantage both networks?

G1 users would have the advantage of being able to have a large number of files preciously kept by eMule users, and eMule users dissatisfied with KAD network could choose WireShare or gtk-gnutella to share their files taking advantage of a serverless network extremely fast and capacitive.

Summarizing my proposal for the future is:

WireShare G1 + eDonkey
gtk-gnutella G1 + eDonkey

If we join forces we can give greater survival and strength and stability to the 2 networks with mutual benefits.
Combine large availability of files with an efficient serverless network. Many eMule users would see an advantage in this.
Thanks in advance for your patience and thanks for your constant work.

Manifest0 October 10th, 2020 10:37 AM

I agree with this. It would be nice to have.

If i'm not mistaken G1 supports DHT, so the issue isn't find the content, but rather the lack of users.

We should have something like a program that would bridge the content between the three protocols G1+G2+EDK. This would improve these networks




Quote:

Originally Posted by falcogiallo (Post 378998)
You should raise awareness among users to collaborate to make network work well by explaining its benefits for everyone.
Shareaza users should also be sensitized and should enable ability to connect as an ultranode to G1 network.

Unfortunately i'm under Carrier Grade NAT so i'm unable to became ultrapeer.

Btw, i launched the gtk-gnutella 33 mins ago, and i'm only conected to 1 ultrapeer instead of 5 :-(

Lord of the Rings October 28th, 2020 07:02 PM

Getting more support around each network is an interesting idea. But ...

I have made comments regarding Shareaza elsewhere so felt no need to respond at the time. Particularly since the Shareaza developers themselves don't appear to care in the slightest for the G1 network.

Quote:

Originally Posted by falcogiallo (Post 378998)
2) On G1 network I found discouragement, there is nothing left ...
Generally If you find any files it is thanks to some Shareaza user sharing on ed2k + G1.

Depends on user I guess. But I rarely download from raza hosts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by falcogiallo (Post 378998)
2) ...
Shareaza users should also be sensitized and should enable ability to connect as an ultranode to G1 network.

In conclusion, if change I have talked about is real, why not bring about a network change that is advantageous for both networks in future?
For example, KAD (serverless) network in eMule is obsolete, it allows the share of 3000 files max, while G1 (serverless) network is extremely more efficient!

Shareaza uses extremely old and inefficient code for the G1 network. Something the devs have refused to update for 15+ years (one or more Shareaza clones even totally dropped G1 support.) Shareaza causes considerable traffic and bandwidth overheads across G1. As an example, Shareaza uses uncompressed search messages. (To get an idea of how much extra that means, think of how much a plain text file can be compressed when zipped. We're talking 3-5 times amount of data with peaks even much higher. And that's only the data. Raza on G1 uses TCP and not UDP for most of its messaging which means it is slower and more traffic just to send a single byte.) I cannot call myself a dev so I cannot be more specfic about the details.

Shareaza's G1 ultrapeer technology is outdated and inefficient. If Shareaza's G1 implementation was updated considerably then the idea of running as ultrapeers on G1 would not come across as being problematic.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manifest0 (Post 379072)
I agree with this. It would be nice to have.

If i'm not mistaken G1 supports DHT, so the issue isn't find the content, but rather the lack of users.

Ideally, the devs would somehow link certain G1 functions with their G2 code as there is no doubt not only considerable similarities but also some functions might operate in an identical fashion. Possibly using flags for which aspects of the code apply to each network.

I cannot comment regarding eDonkey.

In the early days, some involved in the open source LimeWire project were opposed to multi-network apps. Shareaza often used the majority of its bandwidth for other networks including torrents. The bandwidth for Shareaza uploads to G1 was often as low as 0.1 KB/s (or less.) How frustrating would that be to anyone.

However, GTK-Gnutella made the move to adopt G2 in leaf mode. As for further adoptions, I guess it depends on the devs involved. That also applies to the WireShare project. Perhaps a bandwidth test could be done to check if the specific host has enough speed and pipe width to handle and thus join more networks. Some apps tend to do speed checks of their own in any case but this will be dependent upon the other hosts abilities as well and is not an especially accurate method.

Keep in mind, not everyone in the world uses high-end fibre or similar. Due to their location some people are stuck with anything from dial up, adsl, dsl, satellite or wireless where the ability to handle high traffic levels and higher speeds is lacking.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manifest0 (Post 379072)
... Unfortunately i'm under Carrier Grade NAT so i'm unable to became ultrapeer.

Carrier level firewalling is an issue. Perhaps you could negotiate with them? Some VPN services also have this issue.
For the VPN services that don't, your router may well have a special section for handling VPN port forwarding. I would recommend this if using a VPN service (if UPnP cannot handle it otherwise.)

Manifest0 October 30th, 2020 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord of the Rings (Post 379079)
Getting more support around each network is an interesting idea. But ...

I have made comments regarding Shareaza elsewhere so felt no need to respond at the time. Particularly since the Shareaza developers themselves don't appear to care in the slightest for the G1 network.


Depends on user I guess. But I rarely download from raza hosts.


IMHO, one way we could improve would be if we could generate links so we could share those G1 links to share our files.
For example: I could send my parents my videos of my kids by giving them a link, and not tell them to search "Manifesto's kids"


It would also improve and massively if all the G1 clients talked the same G1 protocol and not prioritize the same client.

Lord of the Rings October 31st, 2020 05:06 AM

G1 has been able to do that for many years (for the much the life of the G1's existence afaik) using Magnet Links. Not so sure Shareaza's G1 tools have that ability. Well at least it can be done per file, not per group of files afaik.

With LimeWire 5 or WireShare there is a private sharing option that allows people who know each other to share a private selection of files. Although firewalling can be a deterrrent. They need to know each other's email address using either gmail, jabber or LiveJournal. Once the inital set-up, each time your program starts up on the network your friend(s) private share list will be browsed by your program and vice versa. Possible to have quite a few separate private share lists to share with different people. They can also text chat in real time privately. LimeWire had been trying to modernise not only the way the network could be used but also a more modern look option. I haven't tried using this function in a while so not sure if it still works.

I'm sure several file sharing networks share similar abilities except achieved in a different manner.

Manifest0 October 31st, 2020 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord of the Rings (Post 379081)
G1 has been able to do that for many years (for the much the life of the G1's existence afaik) using Magnet Links.


If i'm not mistaken
, when you use a magnet link, the only thing that it does is to do a normal search on the sha1 (it will broadcast the sha1). This is not quite the same thing, for example a e2dk link.

Lord of the Rings October 31st, 2020 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manifest0 (Post 379082)

If i'm not mistaken
, when you use a magnet link, the only thing that it does is to do a normal search on the sha1 (it will broadcast the sha1). This is not quite the same thing, for example a e2dk link.

I think the e2dk link was a different system. I vaguely recall Bitzi had references to the e2dk links but was not (fully) compatible with G1, fiddly adjustments needed to be made for it to create a search on G1.

I just confirmed the G1 magnet links incorporate the ip address of the sharer of the file. Not sure how well that would work these days if that host has a highly dynamic address where their address is forced to changed every day or so. So the magnet link is sort of like a direct connect system, a system (the direct connect tool) LimeWire 4 used but was dropped in LimeWire 5 in favor of Friends. At least with LimeWire 4 I believe an actual magnet link file could be created. Cannot recall how to do this if it is possible with the later version.

Edited magnet link: magnet:?&xt=urn:sha1: … filename=http://ip/uri … =urn:guid: …

I recall there were some websites that offered the magnet link system that worked with G1.
Torrents have their own version of magnet links that inevitably additionally contain the tracker info.

Manifest0 November 4th, 2020 01:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord of the Rings (Post 379083)
I recall there were some websites that offered the magnet link system that worked with G1.

I would appreciate if you could tell me some. I've been looking for ages for a bitzi alternative but i wasn't able to find any.

Lord of the Rings November 4th, 2020 07:29 AM

I was talking in past tense. Also no bitzi alternatives I'm aware of.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:46 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.

Copyright 2020 Gnutella Forums.
All Rights Reserved.