Gnutella2?

YAY UDP! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-11-06 02:02 · Score: 0

now, the few complete files i get will be corrupted.

Re:YAY UDP! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-11-06 03:38 · Score: 0

It says the searches use UDP, not the downloads.

It's pretty fast... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-11-06 02:03 · Score: 4, Interesting

I've tried the beta release and G2 hubs operate faster than the G1 hubs. I was able to get faster and larger searches. If only the other clients included supportf for G2 in the future. Better not be Coke II!

Re:It's pretty fast... by TOGA!+TOGA+TOGA! · 2002-11-06 02:07 · Score: 1

while that may be true, i wonder how much it will mess up individual user connections. the old gnutella clients were pretty bad in that department.
Re:It's pretty fast... by iofire · 2002-11-06 02:35 · Score: 5, Interesting

Did anyone else notice that on the beta download page (visit the "next version" link at the top of the page) that there is a button to download it via gnutella? It's nice to see someone make use of this as a way to download software.

--
--Avoid metagame thinking, browse with scores hidden (This sig is in violation of itself)
Re:It's pretty fast... by gravelpup · 2002-11-06 04:35 · Score: 1

Unfortunately, the link only works if you already have the previous version of Shareaza. I even tried searching for the install file in Gnucleus -- nothing so far.

--
Things are more like they are now than they ever were before.
Re:It's pretty fast... by Anonvmous+Coward · 2002-11-06 05:07 · Score: 3, Interesting

"It's nice to see someone make use of this as a way to download software."

Kazaa does that. Their mini-installer logged into the P2P network and pulled the files down from one of the peers. When I started Kazaa again, the first thing that happened was people started downloading it from me.

I thought it was kinda cool. Far less bandwidth use on their part.
Re:It's pretty fast... by pod · 2002-11-06 08:24 · Score: 2

The installer does that, and they also offer this capability as a service. It's called CloudBurst, of something like that, and lets people pay to upload their content to the Kazaa nodes, where it's stored in a special shared folder, and it's downloadable with a specially written Kazaa client.

--
"Hot lesbian witches! It's fucking genius!"
Re:It's pretty fast... by zonker · 2002-11-06 08:30 · Score: 0

forgive me for my ignorance, but does it do an md5 or something to make sure you are getting the 'approved' version instead of something that might be trojaned? just seems like a good way to spread something like that across the network.

--
Large print giveth, and the small print taketh away
Re:It's pretty fast... by sgtsanity · 2002-11-06 09:15 · Score: 1

The coolest thing ever is on the forums for Shareaza, they've enabled you to use those "magnet links" (which contain the hash or UID of the file). People are posting images of UI changes that should be made, but instead of linking it to some web host where it gets overloaded easily, they're posting magnet links, which download just as fast over the G2 network. Exponential bandwidth availability growth is really cool!
Re:It's pretty fast... by inerte · 2002-11-06 09:41 · Score: 1

Yes, it does.

--
Buy a Nintendo DS Lite

Hopefully downloads are better with G2... by pilot1 · 2002-11-06 02:04 · Score: 1

I remember when I first tried Gnutella clients, they were awful and i've never been able to download a thing off of one on my Windows or Linux PC, so I finally broke down and used Kazaa, which works fine. Hopefully G2 downloads things better, or else it won't catch on.

Re:Hopefully downloads are better with G2... by bpd1069 · 2002-11-06 02:45 · Score: 5, Funny

I even got my girlfriend, boss, and brother using Bearshare.

You got a girlfriend, boss and Brother from a P2P applications! Wow what search are you using?!

--
--
Re:Hopefully downloads are better with G2... by fault0 · 2002-11-06 02:46 · Score: 5, Informative

> I even got my girlfriend, boss, and brother using Bearshare.

Congratulations, you made them install quite a bit of spyware too.

I would recommend something like XoloX, which has absolutely no spyware.
Re:Hopefully downloads are better with G2... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-11-06 03:26 · Score: 2, Funny

"Skank", "Ogre", and "Homosexual".
Re:Hopefully downloads are better with G2... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-11-06 04:05 · Score: 2, Funny

I even got my girlfriend, boss, and brother using Bearshare.

I'll bet all three are the same person ;-)
Re:Hopefully downloads are better with G2... by sgtsanity · 2002-11-06 09:30 · Score: 3, Interesting

G2 is very, very good. The main improvement is that it has a global search radius. Normally, in G1, you can only see about 20% of the network at any one time. This is due to the design, and to the bad clients (i.e. Morpheus) polluting it. G2 has special techniques (a modified & extended GUESS) to see everything in the network at once.

There are other advancements that improve upon this, but they aren't really the thing that has the biggest impact now, like Tiger Tree Hashing, etc. Shareaza has already improved the network by providing a high-speed, high-efficiency backbone to the rest of the Gnutella network. The Shareaza clients freely connect to the other clients on the network, and so provide a way to see more of the network at once.

So, any way you spin it, it's good for the Gnutella network, especially considering that the specs will be released soon. And everyone who complains about this, even though their complaints may be valid, aren't seeing the tremendous improvement this makes to the workings of Gnutella.
Re:Hopefully downloads are better with G2... by golrien · 2002-11-06 09:47 · Score: 3, Informative

To be fair, Shareaza has no spyware either. What's more, it's almost the *only* P2P client that doesn't eat up half the system resources - Kazaa, Bearshare, XoloX, Grokster (which installs more spyware than I thought was humanely possible anyway) and many others are all huge and silly. Shareaza (and at least one other Windows Gnutella client, though I forget the name) will happily multitask.

FWIW, Bearshare doesn't install insane amounts of spyware. Okay, it's not as good as the 100%-free clients, but they seem to have said "Hey, let's sell an improved version of this to make money" rather than, "Hey, let's piss off all our users to make money"

Variety of standards by pc_plod · 2002-11-06 02:05 · Score: 3, Insightful

Anything that is a move to keep a variety of standards out the in the P2P world is a positive move, stopping record companies finding a way to stop the whole movement by blocking a single protocol, (a la Napster). The more the better.

--

Help the scientists free the world from the evil curse of the dracula

Re:Variety of standards by Nerant · 2002-11-06 02:09 · Score: 3, Informative

While you have a point, I must point out Napster wasn't strictly a peer to peer network system. Napster had a centralised set of servers, and was only peer to peer in the sense that it utilised the bandwidth of those sharing to upload those files to you and vice versa. As far as I know, these centralised servers are in fact what led to litigation against napster.
True peer to peer networks like Gnutella have no real centralised points: the process of discovery of new nodes does not require a a centralised server or servers, unlike Napster.

--
Be kind. There are too many mean people out there already.
Re:Variety of standards by pc_plod · 2002-11-06 02:12 · Score: 2, Insightful

Of course, but pressure on client distibution can be equally damaging, as well as the adding of corrupt files to the network and other such underhand tricks. Having a central server to shut down made Napster an easy target but real P2P systems are vunerable as well, especially if one standard emerges

--

Help the scientists free the world from the evil curse of the dracula
Re:Variety of standards by adamshamblin · 2002-11-06 02:15 · Score: 3, Insightful

I just hope the whole "gnutella2" doesn't end up being vaporous. More interesting than yet another client is enhancements to the protocol, but the gnutella2 web site is 'opening soon', and the 'Full specifications will be available soon', but there is already this Shareaza client out there?

I've been a user and supporter of the Gnutella Network since the beginning ( back when it didn't work that well :) ), and I've seen enough clients come and go to know that it takes a well documented protocol/specification to see network growth and improvement.

Until we have the specs, it's just hype.

--
http://iratepublik.com
Re:Variety of standards by Anonymous Coward · 2002-11-06 03:27 · Score: 0

Anything that is a move to keep a variety of standards out the in the P2P world is a positive move, stopping record companies finding a way to stop the whole movement by blocking a single protocol, (a la Napster). The more the better.
Unfortunately the more protocols there are the less actual selection you'll have. When there was basically just Napster nearly everyone wanting to trade music was on it. Now you've got people fragmented back into Gnutella, eDonkey, Fasttrack, IRC, FTP sites, etc. Napster was so good because you could almost always find what you were searching for. If we further fragment the networks then the terrorists... errrrr.. the RIAA, will have already won!
Re:Variety of standards by Anonymous Coward · 2002-11-06 05:55 · Score: 0

The specs will be out in one or two weeks.
When the beta testing of the v.1.7 will end and the final 1.7 is out.
SO we need only tow weeks to know if Mike is true.
Re:Variety of standards by buswolley · 2002-11-06 06:55 · Score: 3, Interesting

Design the "Trillian" of P2P. One that works on many networks at once.

--
A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.
Re:Variety of standards by Ari+Rahikkala · 2002-11-06 11:06 · Score: 2, Insightful

Remember one fact about real P2P networks: They have a lot of overhead for searching and, in the case of Gnutella, pinging/ponging. IM networks are centralised enough to not have that overhead, so being logged in to several of them doesn't use that much bandwidth. But unless you have insane amounts of bandwidth or are going to be connected only to very few computers in each network at once, you do NOT want to be in more than one P2P network at the same time. Even if you do have a lot of bandwidth, it's a better service to be a supernode to one network than a normal node to several networks.
Re:Variety of standards by The+J+Kid · 2002-11-07 04:24 · Score: 2

You want giFT.

It currently only has the OpenFT protocol as plugin, but you're free (or anybody else for that matter) to write a Gnutella2 plugin or whatnot, and it still connects via the same nice GUI of choice!

--
Moderation: +4. Modded 70% Funny and 30% Overrated. 100% Saturated.
Re:Variety of standards by peerogue · 2002-11-07 04:47 · Score: 1

You're seeing only the aspects of connecting to the "network" and be able to search and locate files.

You're not seeing the "sharing" aspects. For instance, Gnutella uses HTTP for file transfers, but adds special headers to help assist in the transfer (alternate locations, SHA1 URNs, etc...).

I don't know what a "plugin" can do in giFT, but it would need to do quite a lot to be able to act as a Gnutella server.

The only value I see in giFT then is the decoupling of the GUI and the network processing node. I know the gtk-gnutella folks have been planning on doing
that for more than a year now.

Personally, I'm not interested in using a protocol like openFT, because it is a marginal protocol with few users. It does not have the critical mass Gnutella has today.

Thinking!

-- Peer
Re:Variety of standards by The+J+Kid · 2002-11-09 00:35 · Score: 2

You're not seeing the "sharing" aspects. For instance, Gnutella uses HTTP for file transfers, but adds special headers to help assist in the transfer (alternate locations, SHA1 URNs, etc...).

Ah, but OpenFT does that too! HASH search, and HTTP for file transfers, etc. It's just that because of the more stable network (it is based on Fasttrack..) there isn't any need to send all those special headers.

I don't know what a "plugin" can do in giFT, but it would need to do quite a lot to be able to act as a Gnutella server.

The existing "plugin", openFT, can be a Fasttrack-like Index, Search or User node, so that shouldn't be a problem.

Personally, I'm not interested in using a protocol like openFT, because it is a marginal protocol with few users. It does not have the critical mass Gnutella has today.

Ah, but what is the critical mass of Gnutella? Because of the limitations of pureP2P you can only see a small part of the whole network and if you get mixed with good old Morpheus nodes, you ain't gonna see anything in this lifetime!

With openFT (hint, the FT stand for FastTrack, like in KaZaA) the network is far more stable and you can actually see the whole network all the time. And, as of this moment there is a mass of 3.6 TB with 8.2 GB/user ratio. (It has been 5.1 TB, but because of developement it breaks with older versions. (only CVS at the mo)

But to go back to the point, a G2 plugin in giFT would bind both networks together to make Gnutella more stable and give openFT more mass.

It's a win-win situation.

--
Moderation: +4. Modded 70% Funny and 30% Overrated. 100% Saturated.

Other OS P2P technologies by jfrumkin · 2002-11-06 02:05 · Score: 4, Interesting

I've been working with the JXTA project for a bit now, and they seem to be taking a very nice approach to designing a p2p network that is implementation independant (can be implemented on different platforms, devices, etc.). Besides gnutella (and g2), and JXTA, are there other open P2P networks out there? And if there are, what's the best project?

--

"What we have here, is a failure to communicate." - Cool Hand Luke

Re:Other OS P2P technologies by iofire · 2002-11-06 02:29 · Score: 5, Informative

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned it, but giFT is a very nice open protocal modeled after the fasttrack network. (originally it used the actual fasttrack network, but now they use an open protocol called OpenFT)
Check it out at http://gift.sourceforge.net
The ncurses based frontend giFTcurs is very nice, but there also are graphical and even web-based frontends to it.
I use it under linux and have been very happy with it.

--
--Avoid metagame thinking, browse with scores hidden (This sig is in violation of itself)
Re:Other OS P2P technologies by Anonymous Coward · 2002-11-06 02:35 · Score: 2, Informative

I've had nothing but problems with giFT. Finally started booting back into Windows and using Kazaa.
Re:Other OS P2P technologies by WWWWolf · 2002-11-06 04:48 · Score: 2, Interesting

I've had nothing but problems with giFT. Finally started booting back into Windows and using Kazaa.

Curious. I've had very few problems with the CVS version of giFT. In fact, i've found it to be the best-working p2p app on Linux since Napster. Doesn't eat all of the bandwidth for nothing, and downloads are *really* fast compared to *any* Gnutella client. I've actually downloaded things with this thing! =)
The problems have mostly been like "okay, today it didn't work, tomorrow it'll work again"; I think the biggest outage in my case was recently when the new interface protocol was introduced and all clients seemed to work only day or two later.
Re:Other OS P2P technologies by Anonymous Coward · 2002-11-06 05:08 · Score: 0

Well there's mnet which would benefit greatly from some non transient nodes and some patches. It's currently a public beta with version 0.6 coming out soon, which has a new way of searching. Do check it out. It's an interesting project.
Re:Other OS P2P technologies by kz45 · 2002-11-06 06:37 · Score: 1

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned it, but giFT is a very nice open protocal modeled after the fasttrack network. (originally it used the actual fasttrack network, but now they use an open protocol called OpenFT)
Check it out at http://gift.sourceforge.net The ncurses based frontend giFTcurs is very nice, but there also are graphical and even web-based frontends to it.
I use it under linux and have been very happy with it.

I think the gift project when downhill after they stopped reverse-engineering the kazaa protocol. Why bother with a totally new protocol, when we can use gnutella?

just my 2 cents
Re:Other OS P2P technologies by PureFiction · 2002-11-06 12:32 · Score: 3, Interesting

are there other open P2P networks out there?

Yes, the ALPINE Network uses a UDP based social discovery mechanism to implement fast, effective searches with minimal bandwidth and dual NAT support.

Some of the features include:

- High concurrent connection support (over 10,000).
- Adaptive configuration for enhanced accuracy and quality of responses.
- True peer to peer network. No hierarchy, no central servers.
- Low communication overhead (small UDP packets, no forwarding).
- Module support to allow extensions to query and transport operations.

You can read an overview of how alpine works here . There is also a frequently asked questions and plenty of developer information .

Enjoy!
Re:Other OS P2P technologies by nameinuse2 · 2002-11-06 17:41 · Score: 1

some nice reading there and a promising architecture ... thanks.

Muahahaha.. Slashdot? With a sense of humor??? by Bowie+J.+Poag · 2002-11-06 02:06 · Score: 5, Funny

Anyone here find it just a wee bit ironic that a postabout BMG and their so-called "copy protection" (*chuckle*) is followed immediately by a rather technical article on a new, faster, better, low-density P2P client?

Hell, they haven't even managed to shut the _first_ version down!

Cheers,

--
Bowie J. Poag

Re:Muahahaha.. Slashdot? With a sense of humor??? by bizitch · 2002-11-06 02:57 · Score: 1

kewl wallpaper page dude - very nice.

--
---- "Logoff! That cookie shit makes me nervous!" - A. Soprano
Re:Muahahaha.. Slashdot? With a sense of humor??? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-11-06 04:45 · Score: 0

Bowie, you're an idiot.

'bout time by natron+2.0 · 2002-11-06 02:08 · Score: 0

I have been using Shareaza for quite some time now and this will be a much needed improvement. One thing that Gnutella has lacked is a faster systems for searching and sharing. I still don't think it will be able to compete with the easy to use GUI of Kazaa or Morpheus. Either way it is a decent step in the right direction for P2P sharing.

--
[n8.r0n] http://petesweb.spymac.net/

It Would Be a Real Shame.... by CatWrangler · 2002-11-06 02:09 · Score: 5, Funny

if people tested out this network by trading only BMG files at first. Have to beta test and all though I suppose.

--

---
When you come to a fork in the road, take it! --Yogi Berra--

The Gnutella innovation I like by Anonymous Coward · 2002-11-06 02:12 · Score: 5, Informative

Is the Gnutella Web Caching System. It allows clients to find other gnutella peers without any sort of central gnutella server.

Re:The Gnutella innovation I like by Anonymous Coward · 2002-11-06 05:25 · Score: 0

There was a similar distributed Gnutella host caching system (Java-based, IIRC) called XCache that came before the Gnutella Web Caching system. It seemed to work pretty well and was open source too, but never seemed to catch on for some reason. Maybe it was ahead of it's time. It can be found at http://xcache.sourceforge.net.

Crossing fingers by ceranta · 2002-11-06 02:13 · Score: 3, Informative

Let's hope that this gnew version of gnutella will be better and more scalable than the previous one.

Points from the gnutella2.com site:

Level One: A New Protocol

Gnutella2 introduces a flexible new protocol to support current and future P2P technologies. Packets are compact binary trees of named data items, which allow multi-vendor information nesting and augmentation, selective digital signing and other exciting features. Existing data structures can be modified and improved without disrupting deployed software, and advanced topics such as UNICODE support are handled in a uniform manner.

Level Two: A New Data Transport Architecture

Gnutella2 provides two interdependent data transport mechanisms: reliable compressed TCP streams, and an unreliable and semi-reliable UDP transport provider. The combination of these two systems allow higher level G2 constructs to take maximum advantage of network conditions to deliver data packets quickly and efficiently, with or without assured delivery, within bandwidth requirements and without unnecessary overhead.

Level Three: A New Set of Base Services

Gnutella2 takes full advantage of the first two levels to deliver an exciting new set of distributed peer-to-peer services. Controlled global object searching is implemented using an iterative walker approach, with selective out of band response delivery and translation. Combined with an abstract component interest/response query model, this system goes beyond what is available in any other P2P platform. The Gnutella Addressing System (GAS) provides the ability to reach arbitary nodes based on a known identifier, regardless of their connection method.

Level Four: A New Implementation Standard

One of the problems facing the legacy Gnutella network was the varying level of support for critical network features in different clients. The Gnutella2 Standard requires clients to implement the first two levels completely, as well as the dual transport providers with some form of intelligent bandwidth control, 1-bit universal QHT, simple search response, basic metadata (at minimum), simple query language, link compression, root tigertree as the primary URN, HTTP/1.1, partial transfer and sharing. If able to operate as a hub, the full set of generic routing rules must be supported. Support for G1 is recommended but not required.

CLICK ME!

Re:Crossing fingers by Adam+Fisk · 2002-11-06 03:09 · Score: 2, Informative

Almost all of these protocols are existing standards that have been developed by the rest of the Gnutella community. In face, not one of the primary protocols has actually been developed by Shareaza -- they're basically just repackaging the existing collection of newer protocols and calling them "Gnutella 2."

The only new additions proposed here are the binary tree structure for packets and the node addressing system. Otherwise, all of these protocol have been developed by other members of the Gnutella community. "Gnutella 2" is a marketting gimmick aimed at doing things like getting on Slashdot.
That said, it's not all bad. The perception of Gnutella should change, as the network is continuing to develop rapidly, with powerful protocols including the Hash/URN Gnutella Extension (HUGE), the Gnutella UDP Extension for Scalable Searches (GUESS), and the Ultrapeer proposal.

Perhaps the more important issue at hand, however, is whether or not Gnutella will remain an open, interoperable protocol, or whether it will disintegrate into proprietary schemes. As yet, none of the new parts of Gnutella 2 have been posted in public specifications. This is really a first for Gnutella -- the Gnutella community works because standards are published publicly and go through a review process among all Gnutella developers. Gnutella 2 may bode ill for the future of Gnutella as an open network, but I really I hope not. I hope that Mike (Shareaza) will quickly publish any new specifications that he has to alleviate the fears of myself and everyone else in the Gnutella world!

--
Adam Fisk
Re:Crossing fingers by 0x0d0a · 2002-11-06 04:13 · Score: 5, Informative

Yup. Raphael Manfreti (of gtk-gnutella fame) and the Limewire team (also major GDF developers), get no credit, and these "Sharezilla" wankers get a Slashdot link.

Well, *here* is credit where credit's due:

GTK-gnutella

LimeWire

Gnutella started out as an "interesting project". It is now one of the most heavily developed an analyzed projects -- somewhat less centralized than the Freenet project, but far more skill (and variety of clients) on this than, say, FastTrack and the much-lauded Kazaa.

--
May we never see th
Re:Crossing fingers by Anonymous Coward · 2002-11-06 06:50 · Score: 0

The LimeWire people didn't submit the story to Slashdot, dear.
Re:Crossing fingers by Anonymous Coward · 2002-11-06 11:15 · Score: 0

It seems to me that, while Mike may not have invented all of the new technology in G2, he's certainly the first to take the lead and implement it into a Gnutella client. The reason I was never a big supporter of Gnutella was that the clients developed too slowly (Too much arguing over what was and wasn't legal for a Gnutella client to do on the network.) and the network suffered greatly because of it. While Mike may not have done things "properly" because he didn't get his ideas approved by the community first, he's at least willing to test new ideas in an attempt to improve the network (And judging by the performance I'm getting out of Shareaza 1.7, G2 is definitely an improvement over the current Gnutella network.).

Besides, as far as I know, Shareaza 1.7 is completely backwards compatible with other Gnutella clients, so why are you so worried about the integrity of the network?

Kazaa vs. eDonkey by T-Kir · 2002-11-06 02:17 · Score: 5, Insightful

Ever since I've been using Broadband (Optimum Online yeah baby!), eDonkey has won me over vs. Kazaa(lite).

Alhough eDonkey needs a little more work than Kazaa to operate, the file hashing/segmented downloads/no leeching is far better than Kazaa, plus the amount of file corruptions I get using Kazaa is way too much (especially with very large files). I've also started trying Overnet, but still have loads of downloads I'm clearing through the Donkey (Yes I have tried using the donkey downloads for Overnet, but only half register in the download tab).

I've tried using Gnutella/Gnucleus on numerous occasions, bit given up due to a lack of being able to do anything with it compared to the other P2P programs... I just hope Gnutella2 will become a viable option for me to use it.

--
Are you local? There's nothing for you here!

Re:Kazaa vs. eDonkey by Anonymous Coward · 2002-11-06 02:37 · Score: 0

I can't understand how people have such a hard time using Gnutella. It has got to be the client you are using. I have had nothing but success. If I do a search on say something like Creed, I get like 500 hits. I pick the bitrate I want and usually in a couple of minutes I have the song. I think a lot of people who try Gnutella tried it 2 years ago when it was still in its relative infancy.
Re:Kazaa vs. eDonkey by Arker · 2002-11-06 02:39 · Score: 5, Informative

If you have a *nix box (even an apple if it's OS X) you can use mldonkey which is a very nice client. You can operate it remotely from another box, it uses both edonkey and overnet protocols simultaneously, it's partially open source (there is a key component kept secret for security reasons, the one flaw in thes protocols is that they require trusted clients unfortunately) and it really gives you the best of edonkey and overnet both, as well as supporting the move to overnet since anything you're downloading from edonkey or sharing out will also be shared to overnet.

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
Re:Kazaa vs. eDonkey by Jugalator · 2002-11-06 02:46 · Score: 4, Informative

Same progress for me - i.e. Kazaa to eDonkey to Overnet. The biggest advantage with eDonkey over Kazaa IMHO are the "MD5 URL's" or whatever you should call them, where clicking on an URL adds the download to the eDonkey queue, by using the MD5-style checksum. So you're 100% sure it's not a fake file. You can also be 100% sure that's it's not a partial file as well.

I guess the downside with eDonkey is that it requires up to date server lists, although that's a minor hassle really. And that's where the serverless Overnet comes in, which owns Kazaa any time except for the occasional music searches perhaps.

--
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Re:Kazaa vs. eDonkey by bluehell · 2002-11-06 03:21 · Score: 2, Informative

it's partially open source (there is a key component kept secret for security reasons, the one flaw in thes protocols is that they require trusted clients unfortunately)

That's not true anymore. Since emule, anonther edonkey client, released its source code, the mldonkey author decided to open-source the remaining code.

--
-- To bloody go where no man has gone before.
Re:Kazaa vs. eDonkey by Arker · 2002-11-06 03:44 · Score: 2, Interesting

Wow, that's a big change. I wonder where that leaves the security issue though, that's of course always been coming, but now I guess it's upon us... the network relies on the fact that even those who try to be leechers can't avoid sharing the parts already downloaded while waiting for the rest... if the complete source is out it will be much easier for someone to put together a full leecher client... and if that becomes very popular the whole network will become untenable. :(

I never thought security through obscurity was a viable philosophy longterm, but it's better than nothing. What now? Have any of the developers addressed this that you know of?

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
Re:Kazaa vs. eDonkey by golemite · 2002-11-06 04:38 · Score: 1

mldonkey is an excellent client for linux, but for windows users there's eMule, which has garnered alot of buzz lately in the eDonkey community (both positive and negative)

for those having problems with the normal windows client, i suggest it may be checking out

--
http://www.s4biturbo.com/
Re:Kazaa vs. eDonkey by Lord+Crc · 2002-11-06 05:17 · Score: 1

if the complete source is out it will be much easier for someone to put together a full leecher client... and if that becomes very popular the whole network will become untenable. :(

I never thought security through obscurity was a viable philosophy longterm, but it's better than nothing. What now? Have any of the developers addressed this that you know of?

They have. EMule has also introduced a credit system, where you remember who you've downloaded from and how much, and based on that, give the person an elevated queue position should he want to download from you again. This is fairly hacker proof, as there's no way you can cheat yourself to download more than you should.

The actual effect on the network is still beeing evaluated afaik, but around 80% of the ones I upload to, are clients I've gotten something from.
Re:Kazaa vs. eDonkey by athakur999 · 2002-11-06 05:40 · Score: 2

For Kazaa, etc. you can try out sig2dat, which works similarly to the MD5 checksums. You click on a sig2dat link and the program will generate a .dat file with a checksum in it, which Kazaa will use to search for the file.

It's not perfect though, since you have to shut down and restart the client to get it to see the generated .dat files. It's nice when using sites such as Fast Track Movies.

--
"People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
Re:Kazaa vs. eDonkey by A5un · 2002-11-06 06:31 · Score: 1

Quick question:
Does anyone know how to integrate edonkey client with one of mozilla/konqueror/galeon? Say I'd just click on an edk link and it'll send the queue to mldonkey?
Re:Kazaa vs. eDonkey by mlinksva · 2002-11-06 06:52 · Score: 2

I don't know, but I'd love to. I'd also like to be able to have mozilla hand off MAGNET links to Lime, gtk-gnutella or the like.
Re:Kazaa vs. eDonkey by Anonymous Coward · 2002-11-06 08:15 · Score: 0

Shareaza supports magnets (sha1 hash) links which can be found on bitzi.com . Shareaza also supports edonkey/emule links. There is talk of supporting sig2dat links in shareaza soon.

Gnuclues will also be supporting magnets soon. Bearshare should be as well in the next version.
Re:Kazaa vs. eDonkey by Galvatron · 2002-11-06 09:11 · Score: 2

Okay, on your (and others) advice, I just gave it a try. It doesn't seem to have very many files. "Babylon" (to find Babylon 5 episodes) turned up 0 results. "Terminator" only showed 1 result, and that was supposedly a screener copy of T3: Rise of the Machines.
Kazaa-lite, on the other hand, has enabled me to watch virtually all of Babylon 5 (I've just got the last half season to go). What am I missing, how is eDonkey better?

--
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
Re:Kazaa vs. eDonkey by VoiceOfRaisin · 2002-11-06 10:40 · Score: 1

if you are gonna use the edonkey network, get emule: http://emule-project.net

its only been out a few months, vs a few years for edonkey and it already makes up 1/4 to 1/2 of the network. its been the #1 sourceforge download for weeks, and with good reason. it kicks edonkeys ass!
Re:Kazaa vs. eDonkey by T-Kir · 2002-11-06 10:49 · Score: 2

OK, first off there is a little knack to searching on eDonkey. You first have to make sure that your firewall will accept connections through ports 4662-4663 (and forwarding to the machine running the donkey)... most of this info is on the eDonkey site.

When it is up and running, you can do a search when you are connected to a server (a good idea is to get an updated serverlist, one of the places I go to is The Donkey Network). If there aren't any of the files there, then click the 'Extend Search' button that pops up to the left of the search button... to do more searches, click the button then press and hold down the enter key for less than a second, do more short bursts to let any server search results get through.

A lot of the files will be dependant on what people are sharing, and the more blue the colour, the more people have the same file. A great place I've recently found that lists certain Sci-Fi files is Varelse's Sharepool, and another site for other links is ShareReactor.

A lot of the server work (updating lists, etc) has been automated in Overnet, but I haven't been using it at all yet. As I said in the first post, it takes a little more work to learn eDonkey, but I've found the quality of files that are being shared far superior to the FastTrack network (esp. for very large files). There are times that I can't find stuff on the Donkey network, so Kazaa still comes in handy.

--
Are you local? There's nothing for you here!
Re:Kazaa vs. eDonkey by Joe+Tie. · 2002-11-06 12:30 · Score: 1

Not exactly what you're asking and I don't know if this is common knowlege to everyone but me, but I only recently found out that you can drag and drop edk links from mozilla to the gtk edonkey gui.

--
Everything will be taken away from you.
Re:Kazaa vs. eDonkey by Anonymous Coward · 2002-11-06 13:02 · Score: 0

edonkey = pile of horseshit
Re:Kazaa vs. eDonkey by Anonymous Coward · 2002-11-06 17:08 · Score: 0

I totally agree with that. I've used eDonkey for a while now, only recently I've found eMule, and it really kicks ass, much better download speed than eDonkey.
Re:Kazaa vs. eDonkey by jacobjyu · 2002-11-17 07:39 · Score: 1

I have two words for you, Direct Connect. I've seen over 40TB online at once, the connections are reliable, everyone is required to share a certain amount (depending on the server you go on), and everyone is required to have a certain number of download slots.

Very Interesting by EpsCylonB · 2002-11-06 02:24 · Score: 1

It's going to be dificult to compare shareza's performance to edonkey and fastrack because of the difference in size, especailly since at the moment shareza is the only gnutella client to use G2.

What are Shareza's long term business plans ?, are they going to take advantage of the network by selling their user's distributed proccesing power like sharman networks are planning to ?, or postion themselves as a legal media distribution system once DRM and Palladium are implemented ?.

Re:Very Interesting by Anonymous Coward · 2002-11-06 04:04 · Score: 0

What are Shareza's long term business plans ?

1. Come up with new P2P protocol/architecture
2. ??
3. bankruptcy
Re:Very Interesting by 0x0d0a · 2002-11-06 05:45 · Score: 2

WTF would any users donate their disk/bandwidth to a DRM-using legal media distribution system?

That might get IPO dollars, but it's not going to work.

--
May we never see th
Re:Very Interesting by EpsCylonB · 2002-11-06 05:50 · Score: 1

Why ?, cause once DRM is implemented a customer could buy a licence to watch a movie and instead of the company hosting the data themsleves the use a p2p network to distribute.
Re:Very Interesting by 0x0d0a · 2002-11-06 06:32 · Score: 2

That's why the company would want to do it. Where's the incentive for the user?

--
May we never see th
Re:Very Interesting by EpsCylonB · 2002-11-06 07:05 · Score: 1

Well it seems that judging by how popular p2p is that ppl like downloading movies and music. And the incentive to use it once DRM is implemented is the fact that DRM will make any alternative impossible (paticularly the current system of downloading for free) .
Re:Very Interesting by xQx · 2002-11-06 09:36 · Score: 1

muahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!

What, are you a MSFT or RIAA employee??

Thank you for your attempt to brainwash us, but you're going to have to try harder next time.

For your next trick will you tell us that Windows XP product craptivation has eliminated global piracy of Microsoft's latest operating system?
Re:Very Interesting by EpsCylonB · 2002-11-06 10:33 · Score: 1

I sincerely hope that DRM isn't implemented, all I am illustrating is one possible business model for a p2p network. You have to admit that p2p is an incredibly effiecient way of distributing data, if the whole licencing system is introduced and their is no threat of piracy (at least not on the scale their is today) then it becomes attractive to companies that would otherwise would have to foot the entire bill of hosting and bandwidth.

Didn't see the DMCA coming till it was too late did ya ?
Re:Very Interesting by 0x0d0a · 2002-11-06 10:52 · Score: 2

No, I mean where's the incentive for the customer in using P2P at *all* if they aren't saving money by not paying for the item (or paying less)?

I would imagine that once the feeling of a "community" working together, where everyone pitches in some bandwidth and everyone saves money, goes away, people are just going to want to buy the product directly from the company (possibly electronically) or from bricks and mortar.

Witness Napster trying to charge for access...

--
May we never see th
Re:Very Interesting by 0x0d0a · 2002-11-06 11:04 · Score: 2

I'm not *arguing* that it's attractive to the company providing the service. P2P is great for them. The problem I have is why on earth the *consumer* would want to pay *and* pitch in time, effort, and bandwidth.

--
May we never see th
Re:Very Interesting by EpsCylonB · 2002-11-06 11:56 · Score: 1

Well as I said before ppl like downlaoding movies and music, perhaps they will continue to do so in DRM licenced enviroment if their is no alternative.

Why would they want to use their own bandwidth ?, they might not have much of a choice if the application they use to access (download) and view the content is combined and the only option they have. Bear in mind that if DRM happens the way content produceers want it to it will be at least five years at the earliest, broadband should be more common so bandwidth won't be so much of an issue.

You seem to be completely missing the point that none of the business minded p2p companies are expecting to make money tomorrow, they are all gambling on the long term, with the distribution power of a dominating p2p network they could potentially become very profitable.

If family computers and living room entertainment systems converge you could replace a trip out to blockbuster with a download from p2p network (the download would of course have a licence that makes it unplayble after one viewing or a 24 hour period).

Sharman networks are the best example, they are already promoting DRM licenced music and video on the start up page in Kazaa.

Changes by SystematicPsycho · 2002-11-06 02:24 · Score: 1

New legal loopholes, number of law suits hopefully will be reduced. Bugs fixed, patched up and worked a fix for delaying litigation for as long as possible. TODO, find more legal loopholes that will not put an end to p2p, serialz, crackz and bibtex entries also to be added to sharing.

--
Analytic & algebraic topology of locally Euclidean meterization of infinitely differentiable Riemmanian manifold