Re: [Mldonkey-users] eMule Mod to emulate mldonkey

[MLdonkey]

>  > Indeed, since it's easy to fake a mldonkey client.. we really
>  > should have a more complex mldonkey authentification scheme,
>  
>  I don't want to hide. This is a peer to peer network and we should
>  behave like friends not like enemies who need to spy and disguise
>  ourself. Even if emule should not behave like this I believe we
>  should.

I share this point for two reasons: first, no authentification scheme,
even the most complex, would not prevent other clients to fake to be
mldonkey clients. mldonkey is open-source, so anyone can use its code
in its own client. Second, we are only a minority in this network. If
we are too unfair with other clients, we will get ban and can not
afford it.

>  > favorising mldonkeys since they are good sharers,
>  
>  Yes, how easy it is: mldonkey are the good boys and the emulers just
>  stink and should be completely banned. I'm sick of this
>  prejudice. Your stats may show emules don't give much to others, but
>  other stats (including mine) show this isn't true. From my pov
>  mldonkey is the big leecher. 

No, there are leechers in all camps (on the 2000 clients banned by my
client this week-end, there were 2% of new mldonkeys, and I know there
are no-upload mldonkey clients in use). The reason why some slots are
reserved for non-emule clients is that the difference between upload
and download is the worst for emule clients.

>  That emulers don't give as much as their share of clients in total has
>  in my opinion a different reason. Most big releaser surley share with
>  edonkeys. On sharereactor releases I get vast amounts of d/l from
>  edonkeys.

Right. But simon showed me yesterday an mldonkey client uploading at
1.2 MB/s. Not too bad, no ?

>  > Friends favorising looks good to me.. 

This is close to the credit system of emule. Which is known to be a
bad thing. The current system (reserved slots for non-emule clients,
and banning of aggressive clients) is simple and fair. I remember all
these discussions in the edonkey forums on how to ban mldonkey
clients. I don't want to have such discussions in this forum, even if
now it is for emule. 

We should instead think about how to improve upload on the
network. Some ideas:
- better bandwidth management (to increase your upload bandwidth
   without breaking other network operations on your computer).
- some anonymity: some people are afraid of sharing because it is
   sometimes illegal (are you sure all the persons on your vacation
   movies are aware they are on the net, and you are not violating
   their right to privacy ??). We could break the files in pieces, for
   example, so that the files on your computer would not be useful
   (if each chunk is in a different file, it is hard to know what it
   is exactly).
- automatic upload/download: we could implement a spreading system,
   that would download files randomly on the network (if you have a
   lot of disk space, a lot of bandwidth and almost no upload), and
   would share these chunks afterwards. Since it would be automatic,
   and only partial (only random chunks), you could not be seen as
   responsible of what is on your computer (since you don't know !!).
- other ideas ???

>  I'm getting really sick of this whole bitching and fighting and
>  mldonkey plays a lead role. If this continues I have to look for
>  another way to connect to the eDonkey network.

I played a lead role ???? I don't think the quota system for upload
slots and the banning system are bad. I didn't ask anybody to ban
completely emule. They have still 1/3 of the upload slots, which is --
I think -- fair in a network where there are 3 main clients, and where
they contribute much less than other clients.

But I share your pov. I'm also sick of these discussions on banning
ALL emule clients. I did not reply to the mails before. These
discussions are leading nowhere. We will NEVER ban other clients just
because they are different. As for lugdunum servers, we must ban them
only if they are aggressive. 

- MLDonkey