Established Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Ichpuchtli

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. I'm tired. 2.1 crashes. 2.0 very unstable. 2.1 and 2.0 not allowed at private trackers, 1.8.5 has many bugs related to connections (I cannot connect to anyone after some time, 0 kB speed for awhile and then returns...) not solved for almost a month!!!! OK, uTP is wonderful, a light in the dark, it's like God's blessing.... but only when it works.... so.. if not works well it's hell. I give up. No more try-outs, no more try-to-see-if-it-works, try this and try that... Last 6 months was wasted. IN VAIN. and I repeat: IN VAIN. 1.9.15380a was promissing... but better not talk about, at this point. BACK TO 1.6 (great sw!) and I have tools to be safe (against it's supposedly holes) Besides, if I became unhappy with it, you're not the only one client... and sure (I'm blood-crying at this point) not the best one nowadays. WHY? WHY you let the game? Cancel my login, cancel my account, whatever. I'm tired of you. As I was once with AZ. Identical. Typical. Waiting and waiting for a never coming solution. And seeing new projects being started, one after another, without concrete results (no final version fully working, flawness). It was good as it lasts. Life goes on. By-by.
  2. Don't know about possibility or complexity, even if this is the right place, but I'd love to have a "swarm speed" column. Even with estimated average values. Or, something like. Specially when not using DHT (more difficult, huh!) It could be of some help to many ppl who insist having "bad" settings (they will have a good parameter to compare what's going out there to what's happening locally) DNA = kid from uT + BitTorrent marriage? I have many already... hopefully an option function, FGS!
  3. ahh.. you did understood what I said about developing and "taking care" of 4... Your good temper is what makes me staying with you, and loving you more and more. Seriously, I have kids, twins, and I know the trouble.... (hehehehe..) Was just a thought... 16977 is working wonderful here, u/l and d/l flawlessly until now (ok - it's soon, just to let you know). edit: here, few hours working, 16977 is (easy) the best of 4. -----> THANK YOU!
  4. WOW! Isn't 4 brands too much? 1.8.4 (official stable - still) = ok 1.8.5 = seems 1.8.4 will not be updated anymore..., so, why not make 1.8.5 official stable, even if takes a little more time?
  5. Next new moon at 05:32 UTC october 18. 16835 very unstable for now.
  6. 16666 is "sending" packets with 1506 bytes (cable, 1500 MTU), second to WireShark when seeding/uploading via uTP (just 1 connection/peer at 0,2 - 5kB/s) But when connected to another distant peer, sends packets from 120 to 300 bytes max only (uTP). Is this expected? [WinXP-Pro-SP3, Cable PPPoA 4Mbit/600kbit, SBV5120 modem, RTL8139/810x nic)
  7. 16625 d/l... let's give another try. THANK YOU!
  8. @ Rafi: Your MS link is correct. Default value is 2 and is not shown. To change it you have to create one (DWORD), on that key [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Tcpip\Parameters\Interfaces\<Interface GUID>] IF it doesn't work, see http://support.microsoft.com/kb/815230/ b/c you have to do some update. I have XP-PRO-SP3 working here. BTW, I don't know if it's necessary but I have the same string on [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Tcpip\Parameters] ok?
  9. v16222 I hope people at uT have received these reports (uT hung): I don't know what happened, possibly I was far from my pc at that time (I don't remember). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- edit: I tried setting "TcpAckFrequency" = 1 at XP registry and it did helped A LOT. Now, I'm uploading at "flat" top speed regardless peers latencies (50-300ms) with very much less retransmitted packets. With this setting, 16222 is working a way better (as far as I'm testing I can say = brilliant!) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  10. Got a little better upload speed with target_delay at 400 (average peers ping-time = 300ms) but couldn't achieve the same when uploading to low-latency peers (30-80ms). Strange. Both graphs are like a roller-coaster. The same with With was FLAT at top speed.
  11. 16222 working well, but... some feedback: This is after a few hours uploading. The only torrent active is uploading to 2 peers, 01 TCP with 85% speed, and 01 uTP. Both have a HIGH LATENCY of 450-550ms (ping) and goes to the same country. Speed is like the graph, very inconstant. My settings are VERY conservative, 6 connections per torrent, 24 max total connections, 2 upload slots, 3 active torrents max, 5 conn/sec, 5 max half-open, at an 640kbit/sec upload link (Cable-ADSL-PPPoA), bt.tcp_rate_control is false, net.calc_overhead is false, bt.transp_disposition is 15. I did also noticed that retransmitted TCP packes are higher than previous uT version, actually reach 6% while v16126 was 1% max (netstat-s) in same 01:30h time period, with same conditions. Well, this is what can say at the moment.
  12. About a new setting, please, can someone tell me wich clients (family) are able to accept the new uTP header (bt.transp = 31) nowadays? Only 1622? Worth a try, or is it too soon? Thanks. edit: sorry, forgot to say: 1622 is working very well here...
  13. D/L 16222 now. Let's see how it goes! Thank's
  14. About the problems with posting in the forum: I noticed that incoming ICMP FRAGMENTATION NEEDED (type 3 code 4) needs to be allowed at the firewall. This ICMP code is usually blocked due to security reasons. I have had the same problem (looong time to get a blank page after "submit") and I've just allowed my firewall to accept that ICMP code only from IP (uT Forum) and the issue was gone. I hope this helps you.
  15. It's greatful seeing a good discussion! Rafi and Switeck both have very good points. I don't know who is right or who is wrong, IF ANY. Fact is: v2 has "a new approach" and, right now, this have to be tried and learned by those users with one eye on the future. I myself have been got mistaken sometimes, both at my own PC as others for whom I give some care. After some trial and error I did achive the point, for all. And differs from one user (connection) to another. Dev's are doing a great job, and v2 is a great work, with extreme knowledge built-in. So, to start working with the V2, only vaguely remember the principle of operation of previous versions .. and give a chance to learn it all over again.... I'm sure you'll be very happy after all.