Bandwidth = 1

[Xanex]

How many have found that those who are actually sharing the file you need have set their bandwidth to 1, this means it will take 1600hours+ to dl the file from them... you know the tab coloum in the search window of klite Bandwidth, next to the ETA coloum

Suprisingly a lot of them are [email protected]

What should we call these types of people, leach is taken - "File Dripper" since they give u the file like a dripping tap??? dunno
Grrrrr

seems sharing is one thing though sharing at a speed that makes it possible to dl from you without taking years is rare.

Almost as bad as not sharing at all.

what would be good is to make pre set standards instead of bandwidth/uploads/downloads like the new bittorrent gui.

Allow u to specify how many people can upload from you which reflects how many people you can dl from,
Seems there are these people with insanly fast connections sharing at 1 bandwidth. I understand those on 56k but we could make a preset that has like 1 upload and 4 dl, anyone understand what im trying to say? lol

Xanex

[loz]

I agree but people would just use older versions and also I have d/l off people that have bandwidth 1 and got about 5kb/s (yeh this is slow but for a song it is just like d/l off someone on dial-up).

[Xanex]

dial up aint so bad if they have a v92, 56 up and down i do believe (7kbps). yet this would still not give me 1600+ for a 700 meg movie, thats like 67 days solid. i think its those on BB that set this to 1, like to dl fast but dont like people dling fast off them. they fail to realise the faster u let them dl off u the quicker they get it done. if u leave kazaa running all the time change it to the max when u goto sleep , u dont need it then, wake u put it to 50 or something, time zones will help us all since thats a few hours worth of speedy dling

[Switeck]

v.90 56k's have a maximum speed of 53 kilobits/sec down and 33.6 kilobits/sec up -- this requires perfect conditions that NEVER exist... more typically, a v.90 56k will get ~40-50 kilobits/sec down and ~30 kilobits/sec up.

v.92 56k's have a maximum speed of 53 kilobits/sec down and 48 kilobits/sec up -- this requires perfect conditions that NEVER exist... more typically, a v.92 56k will get ~40-50 kilobits/sec down and ~40 kilobits/sec up.

But that means the fastest likely download you'll EVER get from a v.92 56k modem is 5 KB/sec -- with 3 KB/sec being more likely.

The real-world speeds for 56k's means a v.90 56k should limit their upload bandwidth in KL++ to 24 kilobits/sec and a v.92 56k should limit their upload bandwidth in KL++ to 24 or 32 kilobits/sec. BOTH should only allow 1 upload at a time unless the files they're sharing are small -- like less than 1 MB.

A 700 MB movie downloading at a constant 3 KB/sec would take nearly 3 days.

MANY broadband connections have 128 kilobits/sec total upload speed -- so set upload bandwidth to that while idle and 64 kilobits/sec (the NEXT lower speed) while using the connection.

Slow connections BEG for upload bandwidth limits to keep overloads from occuring which can cause corrupted downloads/lost connections/computer slowdowns+lockups.

[TIDE-HSV]

I use a dialup ISP at my office and I achieve the theoretical maximums regularly. Of course, I'm across the street from the TelCom central office and maybe a quarter mile from the ISP office and its modems. Comcast, fairly recently, changed its upload cap from 128 to 256. They announced it to us via email as if they were doing us a great favor. I started out with @Home, the Comcast portion, and was dismayed as I saw some of the other @Home component systems, Charter for example, placing upload caps. Most people don't realize that an upload cap also slows down your DL speed. After the big @Home breakup, Comcast stayed with no cap (meaning 1.5m, for practical purposes) for a while and then they announced that they were capping at 128 in order to protect us from people running "unauthorized servers. " Ha! It saves them mega $$$ every day in infrastructure costs. However, when I'm not DLing, I reset to 256 UL.

[Xanex]

Still , i dont think its the problem with what connection u have anymore i think it what u do with the settings reflecting on the speed u have. since 1 bandwidth would be different for 56k and 512 adsl like me, or am i wrong

Even if they are on 56k i think 1600hours or 67 DAYS for a 700 meg film is a bit off

I think something should be done as there are those with BB who are sharing but making their BW=1. It like adding insult to injury, there have been many threads about leachers but this i think is just as big a problem as leaching.
This should be considerd as an option for the next version

As for people using older versions, inlcude this change withsome major bug fix or other enhancment so they have no choice to

- Sharing Is All Good and Well , But Sharing at a Low Speed is Just as Bad As Leaching Since the People You Are Dling from Are Giving You the File at A good Speed So why shouldnt you!!!!!!

I say make the download speed proportional to your upload speed

If you have an upload cap/pay for uploading then what the hell are u sharing for in the first place, its kinda not in ur interests to be using p2p with such a shitty service, your not doing yourself or other people any favours by being on BB and not helping because you cant afford to or your just plain greedy

[Ad]

That optio is useless for 56k users

[Xanex]

@adhomp

Not at all, they should have 4 dl and 1 upload anyway, besides the ul/dl slots has nothing to do with it, its the bandwidth setting u give to other users. since they do have seperate ul and dl bandwidth it wont effect it either way

and thats y i suggested presets for 56k Dsl T1 etc that way they can have kazaa how they wish.

works with the new bittorrent GUI why cant it be implemented into klite? i think this is a topic for the development section but ill let the mods decide that

I look for stuff most days and see yea great this guy/gal has what i want the exact file, but if its going to take me 67 days solid to get it then why bother in the first place, might as well go back to 56k myself if this is the speed im getting from people, would be a hell of a lot cheaper too

[Switeck]

Originally posted by Xanex@25 May 2003 - 04:06
Even if they are on 56k i think 1600hours or 67 DAYS for a 700 meg film is a bit off

I think something should be done as there are those with BB who are sharing but making their BW=1. It like adding insult to injury, there have been many threads about leachers but this i think is just as big a problem as leaching.

I'll say it again:
EVEN 56k's can upload faster than 700MB in 67 days.

I've even heard of a 56k user getting a non-fake movie that was at least 500MB in size in ~28 hours.

Start messaging people -- most have NO CLUE that their uploads settings are misery to whoever's on the receiving end. Plus, you can honestly tell them that improving THAT will directly improve their downloads -- if they put limits that match their connection speed on upload bandwidth.
For broadband users, it's FASTER to upload to 3-7 (3 for low-end BB,7 for very fast BB) people at once than 10+ people at once -- if the 3 people have decent connections.

Also, the worst pain of all is caused by "optimal bandwidth while idle" which will try to open 20+ uploads at once at &#39;unlimited speeds&#39; -- many people have that enabled and are uploading at <0.1KB/sec per upload because of it... but ONLY when they&#39;re not there to check the upload speeds&#33;

The minimum upload bandwidth setting is 24 kilobits/sec (3 KB/sec), NOT 1. There are ways to set it lower, but it requires Kazaa registry tweaks which I doubt the average Kazaa user would have. It is also very possible that ISPs are crippling Kazaa by throttling ALL outgoing Kazaa traffic from their users to 1 KB/sec or less.

Also, if people&#39;s computers are infected with viruses or trojans -- those might be eating up their upload bandwidth...

[Xanex]

@switeck

My point was not the ammount 56k can upload - at all , but thanks for pointing that out My point was that although people are sharing they are sharing at such a low speed its not worth downloading the file from them, its like a huge deterrant, yes u can have my file but ur going to have to wait shit loads to get it.

right yes i agree that the max ul from a person with 56k is more than 700 megs in 67 days, But what i cant argue with is kazaa is telling me that if i download this file from this person it will take 1600+ hours. Have a look next time for people with BW=1 and the ETA then ull see what i mean.

as for msging whats the point, ill just get some arse response as posted in the "They dont share thread" and since most of them are kazaaliteuser@kazaa they most likely have that option disabled and those that dont are using an older client so msging them wont work.

i also agree 24 ->3kbps but its of that bandwidth they have. bw=1 is the number given by the bandwidth coloum in the search menu, so its not me making things up. i have seen this value vary from 1 to 450somthing. i think it might have something to do with howmany slots they have open so that 3kbps + other network data is divided into 3 ul slots?? i dunno someone tell me how this bandwidth thing works and y it shows up as 1 when i do a search.

i doubt its the isp throttling anything as i have seen many people with bw=1 and checking their ips they are from all over the place.

You seem to have some knowlage of pc&#39;s but i think ur lacking the knowlage to answer my question, really read my post next time b4 u go spouting off about how much 56k can and cant do..., dont worry someone else will have an answer i hope

Xanex