[Stulle]

oh, it says "user editable" in the topic so basically this is not comparable. what wiz coded back in the days for ionix required crypto authentification, dlp requires some coding skill. basically anyone who can manipulate the dlp code could as well manipulate the code in emule. that makes the dlp basically a plugin and not a user editable textfile.

[Ki3r]

zz0fly, on Jan 10 2009, 11:02 AM, said:

if you want to download something from the world, you must shared all your sharedfiles to the world.
bowlfish can download something from the world, but only share partfiles to the world.

That's not true zz0fly! Any IP allowed to pass thru the filter will have full access to all the shared files.

[zz0fly]

source code of ClientList.cpp

int CClientList::RemoveUnauthorizedClients(bool recheck, bool silent)
{
...
  for (pos1 = list.GetHeadPosition();( pos2 = pos1 ) != NULL;) //check in clientlist
  {
	 ...
	 if(!client->IsNational() && client->IsProcessed()) //international user and process by some ipfilter
	 {
		  if(client->IsAuthorized()) //a condition work with a4af, last RequestFile is allowed international traffic
		  {
			  if(file) //file = client->GetRequestFile(), means client is a source
			  {
				   if(!file->IsInternationalAllowed()) //the partfile not allowed international traffic
				   {
						... //remove client
					} 
			   }
			   else //this client is not a source
			   {
					... //remove client
				} 
			}
			else //not Authorized
			{
				... //remove client
			} 
	   }
	   else //national user or unprocess user
	   {
		   ... //recheck client
	   }
   }

from this part of source, we can see bowlfish filter only allowed the international source.
this is not fair. when you allowed international source, you must allowed international client.
there are other filters in bowlfish, i can not check them one by one.
but this filter is bad enough to get a ban.

edit: i can not find bowlfish.11a's source. this source is 10a, and this part is the same as 11a.

This post has been edited by zz0fly: 14 January 2009 - 05:32 AM

[Dick_Manitoba]

} END_OF_THREAD Albania, Andorra, ... Zaire, Zimbabwe

No wonder Bowlfish is popular! And I suppose all that "overhead" dealing with these International clients after Bowlfish is over the "International limit" is acceptable to Bowlfish users, but NOT when they have to upload to them

A very convenient arrangement with "small financial losses" for "greater file gain".

[Stulle]

you know it:

[taz-me]

From posts so far (if I understood right) it seems that if BowlFish code will change to something like supporting additional filter files (which will hold whatever) it will be acceptable.

A question related to BowlFish :

Is reverse logic acceptable (i.e. filter file that holds only allowed ranges) ? - basically it just a measure to make the filter maker life easier ...

Note : This can easily lead to actual creation of subnets within ed2k


Following the same logic (a long ago discussed issue) :

What about Point and Ban ? (giving the user and easier measure for banning someone, because they can, instead of forcing them to add his client ip to ipfilter via tools manually)

[Nissenice]

zz0fly, on Jan 14 2009, 05:56 AM, said:

from this part of source, we can see bowlfish filter only allowed the international source.

This just confirms what I've suspected for a long time.
Once I didn't get a single byte from a bowlfish client when I downloaded more than 30 very rare files over 200MBs each. He never published anything but the file I was requesting. No matter if I tried to download the files in a random order or not.

Why not just remove the whiners from DLP and treat them in the same manner?

[Stulle]

that would not make us any better than them, right?! highly objected here.

[Nissenice]

That is correct, but they can't judge us to be unfair either. Besides I was just trying to seed some thoughts in their minds about what would happen if they were treated just the same. No transfer of complete files in any direction. Not the most preferable situation for anyone imo.

This post has been edited by Nissenice: 14 January 2009 - 05:09 PM

[Stulle]

yeah, you are absolutely right. pitty we have to deal with these kinds of discussions, anyway... it'd be better if people spent their time on things the network benefits from much rather than increasing the own gain...

[Ki3r]

Wow! Everyone here is eager to jump to wrong conclusions!

zz0fly, now I understand why you have doubts with that code. Bowlfish has two levels of filtering. The global (which I've been explaining) and the individual. The latest is used when the traffic limit is too low to keep the global filter off but enough to have one file unfiltered. Normally this is used with rare files. International IPs are authorized to bypass the filter if they are sources to that file. When they are added to the authorized list they are treated like the rest. They can upload and download (any shared file, like I said before). That's what that piece of code you've posted do. Bowlfish 11a, eMule 0.49b codebase, is in beta stage.

I'm not a Bowlfish developer but I know they always wanted it to be a fair mod. The basic idea is always reciprocate.

As a Bowlfish user I don't like to be called neither cheater or leecher (Cumulative UL:DL Ratio: 2.77 : 1) or even whiner. All I try to do here is explain what Bowlfish is! FFS, why don't you try it before you make false accusations? You will reach the conclusion Bowlfish users don't get any advantage for using it, but the opposite!

[zz0fly]

i know bowlfish wanted to be fair. but the way it have done is not good.
first, to download from international, you must upload to international first, not just upload to the sources.
second, if a client was a source before, but is not a source now, the individual filter will remove the client. it quite like a old chinese proverb, "to tear down the bridge after crossing the river".
my suggestion to bowlfish is remove the individual filter.

This post has been edited by zz0fly: 15 January 2009 - 05:20 AM

[Stulle]

OT: is this honestly just one verb in chinese? man, your language is wicked!

[zz0fly]

we use this proverb as adjective, to describe sth or someone that discard one's helpers after their help is made use of.
in this situation, this proverb is suitable.

[tHeWiZaRdOfDoS]

For me it was quite understandable... Stulle might like "Der Mohr hat seine Schuldigkeit getan. Der Mohr kann gehen." better

Anyways, there is IMHO still absolutely no reason to complain about that ban.
@Ki3r: you should try to see the whole picture!
What use (for the network) is your ratio if nearly all your upload went to Portugese users only? Simply tell the bowlfish devs to remove that selective filter and I'm sure they won't get banned anymore. Period.

[Stulle]

yes massa, me like. me like very much, massa!