Re: [Mldonkey-users] ET_COMPATIBLECLIENT

[Martin]

Roland Arendes wrote...
> You should see the whole picture. I hardly doubt that more than 2% of all
> clients are mldonkey, but >60% are eMules. As a fact, mldonkey should
> _not_ favor mldonkey-clients in uploading (I don't know if it actually
> still does).

i never said that and no it does not
 
> > and even IF we correctly identify as mldonkey we still get banned from
> > all lugdunum servers...so ATM i dont see any other way than hiding the
> > mldonkey_id and pretend to be a hybrid....
> You actually don't understand my point.
> IF mldonkey identifies and behaves in a fair manner it won't get banned on
> servers and/or clients.

No you dont get *the* point (not my point):
*now at this point* we dont have any problems with emule. they
dont ban us! the servers do! and even IF we behave in a fair manner,
the servers still ban us simply because we send the mldonkey-id... 
everyone can test that!

> Lugdunum is willing to cooperate and I do not see a single reason NOT to.

finally he has to...there are too many mldonkeys now...he cant ignore them
yes im happy that he finnally cooperates...but why so late?

> He is the guy who knows what hurts the servers, where the problems are and
> knows the protocol best. He made it possible that eDonkey is still alive.

thats true. without his changes we would already use a server-less
network (im NOT saying this would be good or bad...just how it is)

> Remember servers with 1000 clients maximum because of huge cpu, memory and
> traffic load? (I had my own servers back these days). How do you think it
> would be today if servers couldn't handle so many clients?
> Lugdunum isn't the bad guy - he tries to improve the donkey network and I
> think he does this job really great. Improving a server to handle about
> 200 times the users it could do before without increasing any load is a
> very good factor.

i agree....but he is also the guy that includes functions which wont
let any mldonkeys connect to his servers. thats not very nice. and its
not like we choosed not to use his new functions...he just didnt told
anybody (except the emule-devs) about them.... (until *now* i
know...but its still strange: he wont make the specs public)

and to quote lugdunum:
>> mldonkey have numerous BUGS, that hurts badly the network, and
>> particularly the servers. Fix mldonkey or throw it to the bin. 
>> You can patch and patch and patch and patch old software, the result
>> will still be a crappy software, pile of patches.
>> One of the bug of mldonkey is that this soft has too many options that
>> can be abused by (ignorant) users 
>> Having too many options in mldonkey only shows the fact that the
>> programmer doesnt understand the protocol.
>> If mldonkey doesnt follow the rules, it will be banned from the
>> network.
>> A server can be taken down by a dozen of DDOS attackers. mldonkey
>> users have to know that mldonkey is one of the best DDOS tool ever writen.

this is from his first few posts on the mldonkey-forums...
sounds like a real nice guy to me...

no hes not that nice guy. i dont forget that he was one of those who
wanted us to get banned from the official forums and from the whole
network. you may call me resentful....

mldonkey has all these nifty little functions to hide as overnet-peer,
disguise as emule, send false idents....what do you think they come
from? not because its a nice ocaml-training-lesson.

> Fabrice is back on the coding and I hope he'll make the right decisions in
> this issue.

yes i know...hes already at work
 
> PS: I thougt you had put me in your killfile. Please do.

for sake reasons people get out of there after a few months...

i dont want this to get to some king of flame-war...and its not that i
dont like you...but IMHO you got the wrong picture from that lugdunum-guy...

-- 
Before replying see www.reedmedia.net/misc/mail/using-mailing-list.html
When the pin is pulled, Mr. Grenade is not our friend.