no download from shareazaa
 

using phex g1 protocol . (linux version)

coming from edonkey netwerk , wel still on and share my files to gnutella netwerk ,iam used to share !

why is shareazaa downloading from me ! If i cannot download from them !

i was used to the situation that all my connections to shareaza fail , and all my uploads they asked are ignored , have no problem with that .

but since today they are downing from me , and i still cannot download from them ,.

so because this is not fair , iam wondering what happens or what changes that this is happening ?

at the moment i ban the shareazaa clients by IP , and let limewire and bearshare clients download from me , because i always can download from them .....but this is not an "great" situation , and i dont like it either .

anybody have some answers for me ?

thanks .

Salut Gnome2, please say gnutella for G1. G1 is a shareaza invention to better market it's G2. First I'm in the same situation as you (as thousands of others using gnet). I have two LW on the home network and I compiled the one uploading the most to ban shareaza clients. They are not 100% leechers, but they take way too much compare to what they give. It is because Shareaza is a multinetwork P2P. It divides it's upload bandwidth between Gnutella, G2, ED2K and Bittorrent. For exemple, if you have 128kb upload bandwidth on Phex: you can upload 128kb on gnet minus the overhaed of connecting to one network. On Shareaza, if you enable all networks, that 128kbs is divided in 4 (32kb) minus the overhad for each protocol. Yes it sucks. That's why I hate multinetwork clients. On the defense of RAZA, they do share interesting content instead of Morpheus that does not share one bit of bandwidth with us.

Sad :o

not al the time if you play the game fair .

an bittorrent plugin for a program as edonkey is good , torrents will stay longer alive . it depends on the user .

iam intrested in a filter that check for me the files of an other user . lets say video files and the count of mb shared of those video .

i give upload away if an minimal of 6 gig is on the hdd of the other client , all video files .

good filter and verry good for gnutella network .

i wish i have that :-)

The only way for a multi net client to play fair is to implement DL:UP ratio for each protocol. Shareaza does it for Bittorrent and ED2K I believe, but not for Gnutella. Morpheus doesn't have any DL:UP ratio. In those conditions, they hurt the Gnet. Many individuals using Shareaza could say that they upload more than they dl from Gnutella, but as a whole (all shareaza together), they are teasing us with their files that are hard to download.

Ciao

wel they must upload to ed2k and bt-network

if not to ed2k , they will get no sources and upload
if not to BT - they will not able to use the torrents after some time , because sites wil record how much they seed . if you have not a ratio of 1:1 you will be gone and lost .

well thay are banned anyway...................

Yeah I know about the BT and ED2K ratios... They explain why Shareaza threats its Gnutella support as a third class priority as shows the 2.1 release with not ONE improvement or bugfix related to gnutella.

Ciao

why is such an ratio never implemented with gnutella ?

are there any future plans for ?

Because Gnutella is a Kazaa type network where everyone (newbies) is welcomed. BT and ED2K networks are a bit ellitic in the way that they require users to be quite advanced at the network levels (high IDs, port configuration). If LW or Bearshare would limit download by amount of uploads, much of the network would dl nothing (thus leaving). 70% of the gnutellanetwork is firewalled and thus provide much less upload opportunities. (That should change in LW 4.2 with firewall to firewall transfers). Also a credit system à la eMule is problematic as far as implementation accross clients is concerned (Gnutella has the biggest variety of different clients). Better just lobby in shareaza forums to either stop using gnutella or start being fair, like trap_jaw is doing over there. I personnally think they should drop gnutella support (as well as ED2K...). The problem with shareaza is that it is hard to convince their supporters as they are a LOT (in active fans) supporting the multinetwork idea.

For now I prefer lobby against Morpheus, it is less time consuming and more benefical, IMO :D

I can't share the opinion of Shareaza being leeching the Gnutella network. First, leecher do exist, that's no secret, but leechers are far less a problem that for example people that don't configure their firewall or router properly. I think firewalled clients are a much bigger problem.

Shareaza cannot leech Gnutella more than G2, because the upload queues in Shareaza are not configurable to differ between Gnutella or G2 uploads. They're both HTTP transfers, which are treated in the exact same way. However, the user may choose to disable Gnutella and to forbid (which doesn't happen by default) any upload to not connected networks, in this case Gnutella. But then it won't download from Gnutella either. Unfortunately, such clients may still appear in Gnutella's alternate source mesh, and get into the list of sources of a Gnutella client. This fools people into thinking that Shareaza doesn't want to upload to them, thus is leeching. But this is not true, it only disallows uploads, because Gnutella has been disabled on that client.

Shareaza clients can be downloaded from without problems, but it happens that people don't properly configure their firewall or router, which may make it impossible for Gnutella users to download from those clients. A push request is required for this and if the user doesn't have Gnutella enabled, then this push request will only be possible over G2.

Also it's worth mentioning that many people don't use all of Shareaza's network at the same time. Many people (including me) use it exclusively with G2.

Last but not least, it's unfortunately true that Shareaza's support for Gnutella is outdated. This is being worked on.

Firewalls are definitly a problem, but being unfirewalled I know that when I click download from a LW source, it will begin to download shortly because of push proxies and that LW doesn't send query hits when it has an upload queue -meaning a result is downloadable as of now-. This can't be said of a shareaza source.

Fair. But users using G2 and gnutella on shareaza are getting downloads from two network, while users on gnutella only get a half of your upload bandwidth.

It should only be that way. It should be worth mentionning than the vast majority of shareaza users are using multinetworks simultaneously.

I'm reading the shareaza's dev forums. Point me to a thread because it is simply not true. Only talk for now, as Mike himself doesn't feel Gnutella support is outdated.

I love the content you share but I would like to get it while you don't eat all my upload bandwidth. Usually, a source downloading from shareaza = 1-2KB/s which is way too low for a Gnutella source. Acceptable in ED2K world only.

Sorry but I can't understand the goal of a multinet app, except to get more popular at first. Shareaza has now more than 100 000 simultaneous users online, it can survive without my files and my bandwidth. Ares started at 1 000 simultaneous users early 2003. It now reaches 800 000 users simultaneous without being multinetwork.

Ciao

You must differ here. Mike disabled ultrapeer mode himself, so that Shareaza doesn't become a Gnutella UP by default. So he clearly thinks that at least UP mode is outdated. And that's what I mainly was referring to. Operation in leaf mode isn't bad, but to be honest other people probably are better in judging this than me. If you have concrete comments about Gnutella's leaf mode support, then you're more than welcome to post them. (Or about UP support, but this one is known to be outdated.)

Sorry for not being able to point you to a thread concerning Gnutella. The truth is that not all development is going on on the forum, or even in this section of the forum. We also have a development channel on IRC and a help channel, where other discussions happen, which often may be for development, too. I heard about developers investigating into Shareaza's Gnutella support. I didn't mean to promise anything, nor to say that it's going to be fixed in 2.2. But I sure hope so.

The speed of a single upload is the wrong thing for judging. It's the total upload to a network that must be considered, which is not possible when only having Shareaza as source for one file. Maybe one client is giving 10 x 2KB, which is not necessarily a bad thing. With strong PFS, this is even good for distributing a file. Different clients have different default queue settings.

Ares' success is due to other things. Shareaza choosed to rather keep its hands clean.

Actually, I wouldn't bother at all if Shareaza would get away from Gnutella. But it's not very thinkable to remove a network from an application, especially because Shareaza originally was a Gnutella-only client. Or it could be disabled by default, or the max number of networks could be restricted. Whatever, this is subject to opinions, which may differ vastly.

Yeah UP has been disabled since what, 1.9 betas in june 2003? I'm talking about leaf support, we read the same thread mec :D I think I read that Camper might work on gnutella, but that won't make shareaza upload faster, doesn't it? (hint: make a friggin' UL: DL ratio for gnutella or drop gnet support)

LOL that was a politician talk, blablabla here in Québec, we would say that "tu patines, tu patines" (you are skating). All those things are obvious. I'm talking about upload speed divided between networks thus lowering average speed given to a specific network. Not hard to undersand, but hard to defend, hé?

héhéhé, now you are talking about warez, the app. Bullshit. Shareaza divided the gnutella community with his so called G2 then introduced multinet support. Since then BT, and ED2K servers have banned you many times for bad support. And you are talking about warez that does not matter to somebody not using it? Clean? hahahaha.

Yeah this would lead to many useless discussions. Easy answer: drop it. Or make Shareaza gnutella edition with only Gnet support. There would also be Shareaza G2 edition, ED2K edition, etc... Or you could choose THE network you want to connect to at startup.

Stop skating please,

Ciao et meilleure chance la prochaine fois et sans rancune! :cool:

Edit: Ares was a gnutella app at first... they didn't keep that support when moving to their own network. Why would it be unthinkable for shareaza?

Ben, apparement nos opinions sont très différentes et ça vaut pas la peine de discuter tout ça en détail. :) J'ai pas l'impression de patiner, moi.

It's not unthinkable in my eyes to drop Gnutella. I (and many others) don't use it anyway. But I'm not the majority.

Yes, upload speed gets divided by the networks Shareaza connects to. But there are other advantages in multi-network clients that compensate this: Shareaza acts as a bridge between networks, thus it makes content available to Gnutella users that you wouldn't have without Shareaza.

Whatever. I think Shareaza is a good app and other think it's not. It's like this with everything in this world.

I find there is 3 good things about shareaza:
1)interface
2)community
3)content shared

But using another client, I do not think this compensate for being multinet ;)

+1.
[Rant]
The problem is with multinetworks apps. When you are using your own things in your community without disturbing others, you can do what you want as long as others agree. However when you disturb other communities, it is difficult to only say it is a matter of opinion of yourself.
[/Rant]

I don't think there are many Gnutella clients that you can actually ban that way. Ever since Shareaza has been open-source (and actually already before) it has been a piece of cake to circumvent that block. (If you don't want Gnutella clients to download from you, - don't use the Gnutella download mesh).

The reason Shareaza sources frequently fail is that they are simply overloaded. You are devoting a considerable amount of your bandwidth to creating and accepting TCP connections ( an amount of bandwidth that probably does not show in your bw statistics ) and sending busy signals, - not to mention that you hubs are flooded with UDP packets. As far as I can tell Shareaza's lack of responsiveness is mainly a design issue.

I don't agree with the last part. If you are uploading multiple large files, each with 2KB/s and there are few sources per file, chances are that many of your uploads will never complete and you effectively waste a lot of bandwidth (the average user doesn't wait for a file forever). If you upload one and the same file with 2KB/s to multiple hosts at the same time, it is actually a good thing because the hosts you upload to can also download from each other.

I regularly pray that the Shareaza people decide to remove Gnutella support once and for all but considering that Gnutella is considerably larger than G2 (with around 800,000 hosts at any time) and many Shareaza users seem to think it was good to connect to as many networks as possible, it will never ever happen.

funny , shareazaa goes to ed2k network , and leave gnutella .

eDonkey come to gnutella :

if iam right :-)

This is an unofficial plugin gnome2. They use giFT gnutella to access it. As long it is unofficial (ie not integrated into the official metamachine client) I don't really care. In case you didn't know, iMesh 5 beta is connecting to gnutella using gnuCDNA like Morpheus :o

i know , but for p2p and for gnutella i guess it is not bad ( especcially for the users ) . probaly more sources come availble .

I don't think so. It is not possible for them to share incomplete files from ed2k on Gnutella, so we will not see that much of their content. Plus, any download from a host connected to both Gnutella and ed2k will very likely be sluggish.

The files in the incoming and temp dir wil be hashed again newhashes will be generated by edonkey and plugins . so yes the temp is shared but also the finished downloads .

gnutella need to get an system that connects clients with the same speed , would be better for those guys who really want to serve the network ,

my upload is 43 kb/s , soon it will be 130 kb/s with a program as overnet it will find partners with the same speed , i spread my files on the gnutella network ( from edonkey) and try to download some back but getting speeds of 1.5 kb/s from clients is not that good after 12 hours running . so i wonder is there any developing for gnutella , are there new things implemented or coming, where can i read that information .

gnutella is oke if everybody share, and upload with some more speed .

The incomplete files cannot be hashed for Gnutella (SHA-1 of the full file) so they can't be shared.

No, it would be better for guys who really want to download at the highest possible speeds. And you would probably waste a lot of bandwidth on additional protocol overhead in the process.

Overnet's "horde" system is overrated. The speed at which you can download from a p2p network is hard to predict and in general you cannot enforce any kind of fairness. You can even leech from BitTorrent if your client is aggressive enough.


There are a number of new things coming, - the biggest thing at the moment is firewall-to-firewall transfers via UDP.

Salut KathW! Well all that is great. Thousands of RAZA's users do the same. However, you do not represent the shareaza community typical behavior: the behavior we see overall. It's like recycling paper, alone you can save a tree, but won't help deforestation. If all recycle, the forest will be saved. This is the same thing in Gnutella if you can understand the analogy. It would be better to ensure everyone recycle, no? ;)

PS: I'm not in ecology, but I do think ecology has the best analogies with Gnutella :p
N.B: stop saying G1!!! You are honoring Anenga saying that! It's gnutella or gnet.

-well sharing the download directory ( complete files) is good for me .

i have now with another protocoll :

62 gigs data traffic ( overhead 920 mb ) have no idear how much overhead gnutella would have with same statistics.

at least with the overhead i get decent speeds and clients with the same speed as i have .

should be firewall on no download only upload , this will people force to use the right settings . ( see what happens on a nother network, it really force people ) .

difficult to tell, my HTTP overhead is usually below 1%, I don't have any protocol overhead because I am not an ultrapeer.

Then that is the right network for you. I don't care much for limiting my sources to one connection speed. Maybe it's because I'm not an elitaristic pig.

That is one of those ideas that you can really shove where the sun doesn't shine. A large number of users does not have a direct connection to the internet and a good number of them cannot do port forwarding because they don't happen to have access to the router/proxy they have to use.

well thank you , just trying to understand the network and if i have 1745 sources , iam wondering why i have an download of 1.5 kb/s thats all .

what i try to say is that if people cannot acces the router , that could happen , but i dont believe that is the majority .

for the sources of compleye files : edonkey and gnutella :

what you see at least for the netherlands is an upgrade for most people there is an "battle" going on betweens the different isp's ( hope you can follow me ) .

This mean that upload and download speed will raise twice . or as for me 10 times higher .

if you use the right settings downloads and uploads will not go sluggish , if everybody could set an 15 kb/s for each netwerk protocol this will have an huge impact on the p2p community .

the last years my upload was also 16kb/s as for most people with cable in the netherlands , because chello is gonna raise the speed other providers will follow and speed on the p2p networks will getting better .

so slugish download when you use 2 protocols i dont believ that , that will dissapear soon , llook at the combined ed/overnet , seems to be an succes .

sometimes i see the potential of gnutella with high speeds , but there are times i cannot understand why my download is 1.5kb/s with 1745 sources , so i try to figure out why this is .

Also new idears are not bad , using idears from othere p2p protocols is not bad either , if this will make gnutella stronger .

i believe you have to look at the strong points of other networks to learn and improve your own network , look at the succesor and do it better .

said the pig .

Well I can tell you that but I can't force you. That's the difference :D I WOULD prefer you not calling it G1... Shareaza users CHOOSE to call their network G2, so it's okay with me. Gnutella devs never CHOOSE to call Gnet G1, another difference.

Bonne soirée Kath! ;)

If you ask me Gnutella has nothing to do with Gnutella2, they are different protocols which share only the name. BUT ITS ONLY A NAME... :p

My two european cents.

Morgwen

Bad girl! I didn't remember that one... you shouldn't have reminded it to me! ;)

Anyway, Gnet and G2 are two different protocols. A protocol is how a network searches results. Morpheus might be using GnucDNA to download NEOnet results, but NEOnet can still be called another network.

Ciao

You must be right then, because your two european cents value more than my two canadian cents :(

If Kath starts with her two pence I also lost. ;)

Morgwen

to tired to log in
 

link removed, you guy didn't log to avoid to be ban for spam, hé?

new p2p networking.

Low download comparing to high upload!
 

I use gtk-gnutella. I upload files constantly at 50-60K as both in leafnode and as ultra-peer, but my download rate rarely reach over 4 K!!
I share about 5 Gb of files and that shouldn't be too low, when I'm constantly uploading to the limit.
My client gets a ******* ban from some of the ******* Shareaza crap servers!! But, I get no reason why.

I upload constantly and have NO discusting illegal porno ****, just good music, softwares, ordinary movies and some nice ordinary porno pictures and movies with beautiful women.

Do they ban me cause I'm not using Shareaza?? That would be the largest crap of all in that case.

How do I send messages to the server operators with gtk-gnutella? I don't find that option.

I use both of those applications: Shareaza on windows and gtk-gnutella on linux. However, I never had toubles downloading from gtk-gnutella in Shareaza, and neither downloading from Shareaza in gtk-gnutella. Both works fine for me.

Shareaza does not ban gtk-gnutella, because it has no reason to do so and it wouldn't be fair. The reason that you can't download off some Shareaza clients is the following: Shareaza can connect to multiple networks and many people only use some of the networks that Shareaza supports. This means that some Shareaza users will not enable the Gnutella network, but use some other network instead, like eDonkey2000, G2 or BitTorrent. And Shareaza can be configured to not upload or download from networks that are not being connected to. Therefore, if you use a Gnutella client like gtk-gnutella, you can't download from a Shareaza client that has Gnutella disabled and that doesn't allow uploads to networks that aren't connected. But that's only fair, because those Shareaza clients won't download from Gnutella either and therefore won't download from gtk-gnutella.

Shareaza has always used the same policy when deciding which clients to upload to and which clients to download from. When Shareaza downloads from client X, it will also upload to X. (On a per-user basis of course.)

Are you sure you are banned Guest2000? As jlh said, Raza doesn't ban others. What they do, however is giving very crappy download speeds when any because of their idiotic idea of multinetwork simultaneously. I admire Mike, but boy that decision was stoopid.

The results don't appear.

They don't. Shareaza never sends out Gnutella search results when not connected to Gnutella. However, there is another way that sources will spread around: The alternate source mesh. Unfortunately, sources from different networks may get mixed up in that source mesh, making G2-only sources appear in a Gnutella-only context. I'm not very sure about the current situation of this problem, and unlike what I was thinking first, this might have been taken care of already to some degree. However, fixing this problem in the various clients does not solve this problem yet. It's enough that some people use old clients (which are possibly buggy or misbehaving) of their favourite p2p client and this may cause G2 sources to appear in Gnutella context again. And of course, Gnutella clients have not much other choice than to believe the information they get.

I guess one of the best thing to do here is to tell everyone that use old clients to upgrade to the newest version. Or if some clients are still mixing up alternate sources, they must be fixed.

et voilà says Shareaza gives crappy speeds. But remember that while the upload bandwidth will get spread across all connected networks, the very same is also true for the download bandwidth, thus there's nothing unfair about it. Plus, by doing this, Shareaza acts as a nice bridge between different p2p networks; i.e. this brings contents of for example the eDonkey2000 network into the Gnutella network and the other way around.

False. THAT'S unfair, and you know it jlh, I'm sorry for you. You probably know that upload bandwidth is THE limiting factor, the download speed for majority of users isn't. And Raza is defavoring Gnutella with the upload bandwidth split since they prefer respect ED2K and BT than Gnutella, hence the stoopid queues and the shitty speeds. The Shareaza bridge sucks big time and only frustrate users by giving the illusion they can get stuff while they can't. Stop lying please. That's pathetic among the Raza users.

I mean, get real and welcome to real world :rolleyes:

Sorry to sound frustrated jlh, but man SOME don't get it, even if I know you are far from being a newbie. The RAZA app really creates a reality distortion field...

Well, this is your opinion. I have mine, which is a different one and for me it's not lying. Obviously we don't agree.

I don't think it's worth starting a discussion about this here, unless you feel it's necessary.

Well those are not my opinions, but my experiences on the Gnutella field. Fits very well with theory if you ask me. It wouldn't take much % of P2P users with your opinion to kill the efficienty of some networks jlh ;)

Boy you to have been going at it for a long time. With the new LimeWire versions there is a way to effectively block shareaza users. But it pretty much blocks allot of others from connecting to you also. But in many hours of test actually days of test not one single shareaza client even showed up in my Q mostly LimeWire and a occasional bearshare.
But I do believe that this method of blocking would also hurt the Gnutella net especially those who are not running the most current versions of LimeWire. But if I found this method I am sure it will not be long before others figure it out and probably start implementing it.
At that point this discussion will become a mute point because there are allot of people who quite frankly believe shareaza users to be leaches and would love to be able to block them even if it hurt their own network.

Shareaza is effectively already forced out of the LimeWire subnet. As soon as the BearShare subnet starts shrinking (since BearShare stopped development), Shareaza will mostly be forced off the network.

Thanks god that neither trap jaw nor et voilà have anything to do with programming a p2p-client:) .

I have found a small number of Shreaza hosts who have supplied me with files not found elsewhere and I thank them!

The downlads are generally very slow and some slower than that :) though not all. and my signature sums up the waiting time, but hey it was worth it.

Limewire 4.9.23

I shan't enter into the bickering too technical for me :)

..........BTW can any one explain why I get lots of Bearshare and a few Shareaza hosts trying to downoad files off me that I have never had!???? "File not found" is the message..

Well you sure are a troll... Trap_jaw is really good programmer and intergrated many useful features into LW, but I'm sure you know that TROLL.

Next time you are banned. I have no time to play with someone such as you.

I do not know if it is the same with BearShare and Shareza but with WinMx it would remember source IPs for files. I have always reserved 80gb to share and I will move older files out and replace them with new ones. I use to see the file not found message allot when people were searching for files I had removed. But since you never had the files it probably doesn't apply to you unless the files in question match in size to something you have removed from your share file then it may be possible but I am not sure about that.