Slashdot Mirror

Ah, thank you! Someone finally explained the differences.

The larger chunk/block size of eDonkey would definitely make a difference. Perhaps it is larger in order to reduce the load on the servers, which have to track not only what files everyone has, but the parts of each file that everyone has. Having larger chunks cuts down on storage, processing, and transmission of chunk completion.

I notice that aMule has an option to change the amount of upstream bandwidth allocated to each upload 'slot'. But the FAQ says that clients are restricted to having at least 3 upload slots. So if you're still on lowly ADSL like me, each peer is only getting 1-2 KB/s, when it would arguably be better to focus on only one at a time.

eDonkey's credit/etc system does appear rather weak. When I first began using it, I had assumed that the servers stored some sort of 'reputation' for each client. After all, each client has a signature of some sort. But this is not the case unfortunately.

Ah, thank you! Someone finally explained the differences.

The larger chunk/block size of eDonkey would definitely make a difference. Perhaps it is larger in order to reduce the load on the servers, which have to track not only what files everyone has, but the parts of each file that everyone has. Having larger chunks cuts down on storage, processing, and transmission of chunk completion.

I notice that aMule has an option to change the amount of upstream bandwidth allocated to each upload 'slot'. But the FAQ says that clients are restricted to having at least 3 upload slots. So if you're still on lowly ADSL like me, each peer is only getting 1-2 KB/s, when it would arguably be better to focus on only one at a time.

eDonkey's credit/etc system does appear rather weak. When I first began using it, I had assumed that the servers stored some sort of 'reputation' for each client. After all, each client has a signature of some sort. But this is not the case unfortunately.

Ok, being web/HTTP-based, BitTorrent is easier to search. But eDonkey has its own system of credits, ratings, and scores. No P2P network today would be able to survive without some way of limiting the impact of leechers.

Distribution could be wildly efficient if the users and the network operators were on the "same team." If they wanted to, they could design a bit-torrent variant where chunks are cached by intermediary servers, so that they can always be delivered quickly from a local node.

Something like that was implemented a couple of years ago in some emule-clients. They used the providers caching proxy-servers to greatly speed up download-speed. It was called "webcache" and some information can be found here:

http://www.amule.org/wiki/index.php/Webcache
(english with pro/con rating, but rather negative mainly due to privacy concerns)

http://www.emule-mods.de/extra/webcache.gif
(graphic)

http://www.emule-mods.de/?feature=57
(german positive)

• uTorrent (BitTorrent, Windows)
• Azureus (BitTorrent, Java)
• BitTornado (BitTorrent, Windows/Linux/BSD)
• KTorrent (BitTorrent, Linux/BSD/Mac)
• eMule (eDonkey, Windows)
• aMule (eDonkey, Linux/BSD/Mac/Windows)
• FrostWire (Gnutella, Java)
• Cabos (Gnutella, Java)
• Shareaza (Gnutella2/Gnutella1/eDonkey, Windows)
• Ares (Ares, Windows)
• DC++ (DirectConnect, Windows)
• RevConnect (DirectConnect, Windows)
• Valknut (DirectConnect, Linux/BSD/Mac)

And let's not forget... for Linux, there's the ever-excellent aMule client to access the network.

There was no practical reason for taking down Razorback.
The only reason, it was well known.
If you want make a show. You don't take down a small
Site that no one every heard of you attack the more popular one.

Did this affect the donkey network? No.
My emule client made a beep when that server dropped off the net. 10 second later it reconnects to one of the 100's of real servers out there and restarts my download.

http://www.amule.org/wiki/index.php/FAQ_eD2k-Kadem lia

The internet and internet applications are tuff and by design were made to work around disruptions. It was designed to work even if segmented after a nuclear war.

So I'm sure it's more than a match for the MPAA.

zbeast

You can always use eMule (win32) / amule (linux/max/e.a.) Shareaza (win32) or limewire (win/max/javathingy) to perform those searches for you.

The music labels got to realize if they push the p2p networks too hard the p2p clients will go underground into anonymous networks

I see Shareaza in the client list sometimes, so I know they're speaking the same language to at least some degree. For all I know Shareaza has lots of yummy features that aMule does not, but at least there is no IE required.

Granted, at 56k, it's not particularly fast, but Azureus management doesn't really need to be.

Sadly, I'm not interested in eMule's "wait two weeks to start your download" technology. Plus, there is no official support for non-Windows platforms.

eXeem is NOT related to Bittorrent in any way. It does not use the Bittorrent protocol nor an extension of it. It is yet another P2P application/network that is trying to captilize on an already popular application/network/protocol. Considering that it is closed source, Windows only, spyware stricken, and leeching off of Bittorrent's popularity, it would be wise to boycott eXeem.

If you want to use a P2P application that combines the swarming of Bittorrent with distributed indexing, searching, and tracking, try one of the eDonkey apps such as aMule, eMule, eDonkey2000, etc. Many of them are open source, spyware free, and run on multiple platforms. Since the eDonkey network has been around for a long time, it is filled with a variety of content. However, Bittorrent is still the fastest P2P protocol for raw data transfer, so don't drop it, just find a few good torrent sites.

I use aMule

Ever tried aMule? http://www.amule.org/

It's way beyound any other linux client for ed2k, succesor of lmule and xMule projects. Their lastest versions, like 2.0.0-rc5 have so much improvements on stability and speed that it's rock solid and fast. They seem to include lastest network features from eMule too, they are in touch with the eMule developers (and eMule is what sets the standards on the network now).

I tried mldonkey but it was painfully eating all my resources and I got not nice downloads at all... until I found lmule, xMule, and then aMule. Tried mldonkey from time to time to test improvements, but never left the *mule world.

Also, I heard aMule is working on Mac too and they will release to public some usable betas in few days.. so why use a donkey when you can use a mule?

For Linux, try aMule http://www.amule.org/. Definitely better than mldonkey and kmldonkey.

If you're on a Mac, you'll be using mlDonkey. I don't think it has these nice things, however. Contrary to the story submitter, I'd recommend aMule for Linux. I think it has those nice eMule features. Some time in the not-so-distant future they promise to have a working OS X version too.

aMule

I meant to link to aMule, and not eMule (since it's been abandoned by it's attention hungry sociopath dev).

--

aMule is the better client (despite the psycho's bashing and admitted 'wget -r' bandwidth draining.)

--

Hooray, now I can watch their movies

You could before!

Linux: aMule
Windows: eMule

And if you feel guilty, just send a couple of dollars to the Pixar guys... ;)