|
|
|
Gotta router? LOWID in eMule? Come here!
|
|
Member
|
15. August 2006 @ 17:47 |
Link to this message
|
|
justawr, keep in mind that the connection rate that your PC gets via it's connection to the router should ALWAYS be at 100 Mbps; it's your router's connection rate to your ISP that will differ. many routers (and some ISP's) have a way to show you this rate in their "menus".
have you tried asking your ISP if they have any "inhibitors" installed in their setup? most smaller ISP techs (once they realize that YOU may know what you're talking about) won't be too proud to let you know what's up, if you're polite about it.
and the only way to get into most ISP's "routing" systems, is to link directly to the hardware, so unless you're REAL friendly with the staff...
darkflux
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
justawr
Junior Member
|
16. August 2006 @ 00:35 |
Link to this message
|
|
..ok practically i've a receiver/transmitter, to a box, to a box with flashing lights, a LAN cable then the computer, and a built in Realtec 8139/810X,it could be one of these that's restricting the rate ?..nothing that has more than one in/ one out socket. Nothing that says router
..as far as finding the techies, mmmmmm, gonna have to play careful there, but worth trying...
..toodA irB moasly 'experimentin'
|
Member
|
16. August 2006 @ 12:49 |
Link to this message
|
|
interesting, i have a similar setup with my IP :)
hmmm... well the first thing to do would be to "ID" those boxes. if you don't want to deal with your ISP's techs, try checking your original invoice for the setup. more often than not, that at least lists the parts you're liable for. as long as you set everything up using pun1's "checklist, you can essentially rule out your network card (the "Realtek", if i am understanding you correct). and the transmitter/receiver only affects singal strength, so...
darkflux
|
|
justawr
Junior Member
|
19. August 2006 @ 00:21 |
Link to this message
|
|
..finding the real techies is the hard part, the ones that you deal with just follow a list. The grey plastic boxes are short on identifying marks, the flashing light one has ESD 0401904C on the inside but no manufacturer
..bizarely some time last night, according to emule, i hit a d/l of 360kBs ? so the system must be capable of it
..away now to follow punishers list..wish me luck..
..toodA irB moasly 'experimentin'
|
|
justawr
Junior Member
|
19. August 2006 @ 01:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
..sighh, no joy, still a low ID, i'l go play with a few other ports, who knows..
..oh, btw, i do realise each individual d/l rate is set by the sender to a degree, it's my overall that's poor, wrongly so if i can mange 360 KBs anytime at all, even if briefly
..toodA irB moasly 'experimentin'
|
|
justawr
Junior Member
|
19. August 2006 @ 01:31 |
Link to this message
|
|
..nope, by steps of 5 upwards, 4 tries still low ID
..err however, when emule tests ports why doesn't it test my IP adress ? KAD also gives the same wrong IP adress, but at least follows the ports
..toodA irB moasly 'experimentin'
|
|
justawr
Junior Member
|
19. August 2006 @ 01:44 |
Link to this message
|
|
...oookkkk, problem clarified, no, i haven't got a high ID, but, the adress being tested every time is my ISP, not my personal IP adress/set up
..203.84.186.122 is Meridian Telekom in Manila, my ISP, not my personal alloted addy...guess i'll never get hi ID. Mind you, the possibility of a p2P within the Merdian fireproofing does cross my mind...
..as does maybe using the yahoo ports ?
..toodA irB moasly 'experimentin'
|
|
manta100
Junior Member
|
19. August 2006 @ 05:18 |
Link to this message
|
Hey Guys,
Long time no see... hope all is well.
As some of you may know.. I always suspected the windows firewall to be a big pain the :):):):) even when you turn it off, it is still humming there behind the scenes... and block your programs.
I recently purchased the Philips RC9800I remote control which can stream media files through your wireless network to any room in your house.
I was getting really frustrated when the device couldn't see the media server running on my desktop. I tried it with my laptop which runs SP1 only.. and it worked just fine... which supported my long time suspicion. Once I removed the windows firewall (YES!!! it is possible) all my problems disapeared and eMule was never happier :-)
A simple google search brought up this page which I wanted to share with you:
firewall.html" class="korostus" target="_blank">http://www.xpmaximized.com/archives/uninstall-windows-xp-firewall.html
This will guarantee that you eliminate this enigmatic evil and focus on your router settings...
Happy downloading...
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 19. August 2006 @ 05:20
|
Member
|
19. August 2006 @ 05:47 |
Link to this message
|
ahhh, i thought so. when you described your setup it sounded alot like mine (except the couple of boxes), and my ISP's IP shows up in Kad, etc. as well. what is happening (most likely) is that your ISP has devices that "analyze" data being transfered, and if it spots anything that seems like P2P traffic, it drops the speed on that port. this is called "traffic shaping" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_shaping), and is what my ISP is doing to my connection, presently.
if you can't I.D. the boxes, have you tried (this may sound entirely obvious, but) disconnecting them (in any number of combinations)? NOT the receiver/transmitter, of course, but if you're not sure of the others, THEY may be the very thing limiting your P2P usage...or not, just a thought. btw, regarding your 360K download speed, the highest mine lists is 356...count your blessings ;)
also, i'm not sure what that meant "using the yahoo ports", could you explain, or was that just a joke?
manta! welcome back :) thx 4 tha link, i'll check it out when i get time...
also, has anyone heard of "HTTP Tunneling"? saw it mentioned at: http://forum.emule-project.net/index.php?showtopic=88333
it was about this nifty little service: http://your-freedom.net/ (which, coincidentally stopped working with P2P traffic recently [mentioned in FAQ section]). if this supposedly worked with P2P at some point, perhaps someone could set up an "overseas" version of it (so the lousy U.S. Gov can't *%@# with it), for use with eMule.
just a thought...
darkflux
|
|
justawr
Junior Member
|
19. August 2006 @ 16:18 |
Link to this message
|
|
..glad i came here, i'm learning, sooo what i have is a "leaky bucket" traffic control, kindly provided by my ISP, Leaky cos i still get bursts, rapidly throttled true but there..
..it would seem that it's not fool-proof as a control system tho, bursts up to 360kBs with emule , and virually every download via Yahoo bursts before being throttled. I continue to wonder if emule can't use this fault point, and switch ports continually, say as soon as the dl rate drops below, errr, 150 ? It may take up a little more processor power at both ends but would virtually kill stone dead the bloody throttle...
..i say fault point, and mentioned using Yahoo ports because it's most obvious on yahoo downloads, kicks in at 150-180 then drops, BUT the slow-down is noticable with the naked eye, and takes 10 to 30 seconds to arrive at slooowwwwwwww, whereas emule slows far more quickly,(emergency brakes) an indication that Yahoo is getting special treatment...incidentally the throttle on the BBC radio is spotty to say the least, and may , with my ISP, be linked to current traffic, not the source point
..i think i need a mule-techie, and we need a port "search and use" sub-routine that runs slightly in advance of the dl/ul prog
..toodA irB moasly 'experimentin'
|
|
justawr
Junior Member
|
20. August 2006 @ 05:15 |
Link to this message
|
..toodA irB moasly 'experimentin'
|
Member
|
20. August 2006 @ 07:10 |
Link to this message
|
nmap, eh? to tell you the truth, i'd heard of it before, but from most peoples' descriptions i had no idea what it did. seems to be mainly used to tighten security issues, but since it's open-source, were you thinking some of it's port-scanning features could be integrated into eMule? perhaps so, and actually, i can't imagine why, with as many eMule/eDonkey versions that people have made, that one of THEM hasn't integrated such a feature, just like i was saying that BitTornado does for BitTorrent... BitTornado randomly changes between a predetermined number of ports (although i'm not sure how frequently), and it's open source as well, so maybe THEY could be integrated?
at any rate, not sure how much YOU know about writing/reading source code (i suck at it), but if you DO, i would try and e-mail one of the people who've made one of those many versions of eMule with your ideas. they would be most likely more receptive to integration than, i'm sure, eMule's crew might (no offense to them).
oh, and not sure if you noticed/read about this: http://seclists.org/nmap-hackers/2004/q3/0002.html
seems nmap has limited usability on WinXP boxes with SP2 installed on them, although SOME of this seems to have been overcome... also keep in mind that due to this, it seems the GUI is no longer viable, and nmap can only be run in command line (which sucks for me :P). just a heads up.
thx 4 that link though, man. appreciate all infos on stuff :)
darkflux
|
|
justawr
Junior Member
|
22. August 2006 @ 05:50 |
Link to this message
|
|
..mmm, thanks for the warning, i hadn't read that bit..
..dunno if it's hacking tho, i'm trying to break out, not in..
..my point with the nmap was is it any use ? there's thousands of these port-thingies, surely they can't watch them all,
..and no, i'm not currently a computer-techie, i chose fresh air, sex, drugs, n rock'n'roll in 86, still seems a fair swop....
..toodA irB moasly 'experimentin'
|
Member
|
22. August 2006 @ 06:38 |
Link to this message
|
|
i don't know if i'd call it "hacking"..."circumventing" is a more appropriate word, for all intended purposes. anyways, as far as I'M concerned, what i do with MY internet connection should be up to ME ;)
nmap seems to just be to test if your port(s) are "open" and accessible for use. also, when an ISP uses traffic shaping to limit P2P speeds, it doesn't watch ALL the ports, just the ones in use. what it DOES do, is called "deep packet inspection", which watches the data to determine if it is P2P or not, which takes about as much time to verify (supposedly) as it does to connect to an eMule server, so that none of your downloads even have a chance...
oh, and for someone who chose Sx-Rx-&-RNR, you seem to be catching on to all this rather quickly ;)
cheers,
df
darkflux
|
|
IceDaMan
Newbie
|
6. September 2006 @ 16:40 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hey boyz, I know this isn't the right place to post this in, but I need to reinstall/format my PC. My C drive will stay, which is the original HD. I added another HD, lets call that one D drive.
It had to be partitioned cuz it's a big HD(that's what I was told, that I need to partition it to be able to actually use it).
Anyway, I have data on D HD. I don't want to format that HD. If I format/reinstall windows, my SP2 will not be there, and that's what is needed for my HD to be partitioned. The original settings are SP1 with my XP.
So, my question is this: Will I lose the partition or the data if I format/reinstall. Since I'm losing SP2, so D HD can't function, and so will the partition be still there, will my data be safe, or should I just pull the burner out and get burning?
Thanks. sorry for posting this here.
ICE
|
Member
|
7. September 2006 @ 05:11 |
Link to this message
|
|
IceDaMan SP2 has absolutley nothing to do with partitioning a hard drive. In-fact i believe WindowsXP SP1 can see up to and maybe even more than a terabyte of storage. WindowsNT had capabilities partitioning and formatting hard drives. SP2 is mainly related to WindowsXP once Windows is up and running. Your WindowsXP SP1 CD has all the capabilities for partitioning, formatting as well as other usefull utilities for pre-Windows environments. After you install WindowsXP SP1 you can easily download SP2 from the microsoft update site. I just did one yesterday - no prob.
If you are installing WinXP on the C:\ you will NOT lose data on the D:\. Partitioning a HD only partitions what you specify to be partitioned and formatted.
BE CAREFUL!! If you are not used to partitioning and formatting HD's the menu can look a little confusing especially if all installed hard drives have multiple partitions already. This is what I tell those who are in the same boat but don't have a lot of experience. Unplug the D:\ (for now). Unplug the data and/or power cable that way you don't accidently wipe out the wrong HD. After Windows is installed you can then plug the D:\ back in and Windows will easily recognize it and all your data will be there.
If you are happy with the way the D:\ is working and partitioned you do not have to partition it at all. Its fine the way it is.
Hope this helps.
Let us know.
BF2 player; punisher_bob and you just got smoked!!
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
7. September 2006 @ 05:13 |
Link to this message
|
|
SP1 has support for big drives, but not without any service packs at all, that limits you to 127GB I think. Another little be careful, if you're unplugging/replugging a hard disk, don't do it when the PC on, it'll only end in tears! :D
|
Member
|
7. September 2006 @ 05:54 |
Link to this message
|
sorry i got here late guys, been busy ;)
lotsa good info, just thought i'd offer my experience. 127GB is the peak if you don't have SP1 at least. if you have SP1, then everything SHOULD be in order. 2 things, though:
1. if you formatted the HD BEFORE you had SP1, then after SP1 (or SP2) is added, the HD will STILL be limited to 127GB (or thereabouts. Microsoft's website says 137GB, but after formatting...).
if this is the case, you just need to partition the rest of the space to another partition, then you can use it.
2. if you have an "older" MB, IT may not support large hard drives. on my older PC, i had to install a PCI card for large HD support. anything made since 2001 or 2002 should NOT have this problem, however. if you ARE on an older board, then, again, you just need to partition the rest of the unused space.
here are some interesting links on the topic:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;303013
http://www.pcreview.co.uk/forums/thread-366867.php
as punisher1 noted, partitioning doesn't affect data, it simply "allots" usable space as separate drives; i.e., if you DO decide to partition "D" drive, it will just add "E" [and maybe "F" and "G", depending on the size of the HD ;) ].
hope this helps.
also as punisher said, it's a good idea to unplug "D" before formatting C (not while it's on). especially if the 2 hard drives are the same size (like mine was) you could accidentally format the wrong drive (like mine was) ;)
darkflux
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 7. September 2006 @ 05:59
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
7. September 2006 @ 06:19 |
Link to this message
|
|
Lol I like the sound of you, darkflux, you sound like you've got your experience by making mistakes people really shouldn't make, which makes you like me! I'm also one of the people who learnt you shouldn't hot-plug molex connectors the hard way, fortunately I didn't damage anything!
|
Member
|
7. September 2006 @ 06:41 |
Link to this message
|
|
hey guys, glad to hear from everyone.
here's somemore info that might help. basically, the HD size depends on the type of file system you are using...
FAT32 supports up to 2 TeraBytes but will only partition up to i believe 32GB. You can increase the size of the partition but only by using 3rd party utilities.
Natively NTFS will support 2 TB but is limited in creating up to 127GB partition give or take a gig or two when using WinXP SP1.
By-the-way icedaman i recommend using NTFS partitioning.
There are some ways to read the entire size of a hard drive even if larger than a 130GB drive even if you do not have a Winxp CD with SP2. But it can be a bit confusing and dangerous if you've not done it before.
later guys...
BF2 player; punisher_bob and you just got smoked!!
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
7. September 2006 @ 06:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
FAT32 is capable of formatting drives well in excess of 32GB, which I didn't think possible but saw with my own eyes when the hard disk in my second PC came formatted - 160GB FAT32ed to 147. (notice that's an 8% loss not 7 as is common with NTFS). However, one of the other downsides of FAT32 is that it can't recognise a file any larger than 4GB. You can't make or read disk images (iso,bin etc.) of full size DVDs with FAT32 as they exceed the 4GB limit.
|
Member
|
7. September 2006 @ 07:26 |
Link to this message
|
|
i also recommend NTFS as file system of choice (for many reasons).
btw, FAT32 CAN format drives greater than 32GB on WinXP, just not USING WinXP. the reasoning for this is that the drives read slightly slower the higher past 32GB they go (so i'm told). boot time with FAT32 is increased because of the time required to read all of the FAT structure.
it seems the 32GB limitation is exclusive to WinXP. WinME can format an 80GB HD to it's full amount past the 32GB marker [man, it's sad that i know that...]. however, please do not take that as me trying to sway you back to WinME. just me reminiscing.
btw sam, that molex mistake is one you only make once, trust me on that one. freakily enough though, i didn't fry my HD, but rather, the molex, haha :D lucky for me, my new SATA's are hot-swappable ;)
darkflux
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
7. September 2006 @ 07:41 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hence why you can have external S-ATA and not External IDE! LOL. Yeah, don't give people the wrong ideas about Me, I hated it and so did everyone else I know who tried it.
|
Member
|
7. September 2006 @ 08:11 |
Link to this message
|
|
the worst part about WinME, was that almost ALL the tens of dozens of programs i had didn't work on XP and i had to get ALL the latest versions! that's why i left Win98 on my old PC, lol.
btw, for the record, i have 6 hard drives hooked to my one PC right now, with a combined total of 1TeraByte :) 4 int., and the 2 externals, which i formatted with FAT32, only so i can transfer some of the files to any of my friends' PC's (and my old one). NTFS drives can read FAT32 volumes, but NOT vice versa.
darkflux
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 7. September 2006 @ 08:12
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
7. September 2006 @ 08:19 |
Link to this message
|
|
Lol once again you sound like me, too many hard disks! I had four for my old unit, 3 in and 1 out, was intending to have 5, but one died as i put two in due to my PSU accident. I've owned a total of 10 hard disks in my life, and yet I'll still need to borrow one or two to get my 250s out of RAID!
|
|
