Hi all

Re upload speeds and T1 or T3: Find out what your ISP has allowed by doing several tests from a site that measures your uploads, like http://www.broadbandreports.com/stest

If you can manage 100 KB/s upload speed (1000 bps ) or better, then you can set as a T3 and reduce the upload bandwidth to the minimum of that scale, which is ~97 KB/s. For other upload speeds, try the different setting in the LW options and choose the one that has the range you can handle.

Re the slots: the magic words are "client side queueing." This means you could choose to download 500 files, but only one or two requests would be sent at a time (your machine would be polite and only send more when the others finished). That way, your LW would automatically honour whatever limit the other had set, and there would be no risk of being banned as "greedy" because LW would know not to ask for a harmful number. The person who asks for 60 of my pics (120 MB) would be treated the same as the person who wanted one video (120 MB). I would not want the person who asked for 60 videos to deny the people interested in the pics Client -side queueing would make fair sharing of upload slots and bandwith much fairer IMHO.

Please register and vote at https://www.limewire.org/jira/browse/CORE-21 if you want this feature added to future LimeWires (the developers consider the votes when deciding what features to work on).

Cheers all.

Now that's a feature more needed then any other and I will gladly give it my vote.

They could almost call it Limewire 5 if that was done

Only a Hobo

If your bandwidth is never reached why don't you allow more slots and more per person? It's the BW that regulates the drain on your PC so then it would be first come first serve and the speedy ones would get out clearing the way for other traffic. Can you imagine all the checkouts in a store limiting your items how would you feel about that?

Thanks for your imput as i really want to know if their are stingy hosts out there or just what i would consider faults in the system. If it is the later then i would never ban anyone but with the situation i have described here

(When downloading from a host my first DL slot would stop downloading; even if i hit the hosts limit shouldn't i maintain my slot on that DL and understandably get a (wait for busy host or upload limit reached) on the other requested DL? Especially while he is still downloading the 3 slots from me meaning he is still active)

it seems like certian hosts derail me when i try a second DL and i can't get back on with that host. These hosts are gonna get banned from me until someone here can give me a logical reason for this to happen. I hate rules and think banning is **** but freeloaders are ******* leeches who need a fire under their ***. Sorry but limitting your upload traffic by any other means than bandwidth seems a bit harsh and although not the same as being a leech it still demonstrates excessive control.

Something that puzzels me i never get a banned for being greedy message; but i have never used anything under 4.10 do the newer versions still send this message if you are banned?


stief

That would be a very cool feature Thanks i have voted and hope more do. Have you or could you dedicate a thread to that feature and try to get more involved

I have done speed 2 tests and they vary UL 200kbps/300kbps DL 800kbps/900kbps but i couldn't find any that worked in my country and i was connected to LW don't know if it makes a difference. To be honest speed isn't my real issue it's incomplete downloads that are winding me up.

Thanks