peer exchange/peer caching.

[Firon]

Because we've dealt with private tracker admins before, and most of the time, it's a problem on their site, or a totally clueless admin. So we assumed it was the same case here, especially since it appeared to be you guys claiming that µTorrent's DHT was the culprit, even though it's plainly obvious that it respects the private flag, and this can be verified. When there was an actual problem with µTorrent, it was because of something that was proven, such as no key support (which was implemented later), or a badly implemented multi-tracker implementation (which was also fixed). But they gave proof, the developer acknowledged it, and the problem was confirmed. All we saw here was absolutely no proof, just a blank statement about µTorrent getting banned, and not even with the correct terms.

And one of your moderators said peer exchange was the reason µTorrent was causing "illegals" to come into your swarm, even though the client has no such support for that feature (and why would we lie about uTorrent NOT having a feature, especially when it's something people are requesting?)

Again, there's no proof provided here. There's plenty of proof that could be provided, such as capturing packets to see if these things are actually happen, but none was provided, and you guys instead just banned the client based on pure circumstance.

There's no ill will towards you, we just think you're wrong, and would like to see proof that µTorrent is really at fault and a chance for some better tests to be conducted.

There's no problem with admitting uTorrent is at fault when it's actually proven, hence all the various bugfixes and feature additions to work with trackers' demands.

[laffin]

Funny how all these posts believe that DHT in utorrent is complete.

When in fact it was a reverse engineer job from the popular BitComet implementation, which is incompatible with the Azareus implementation.

As with any reverse engineered job, it may not be perfect, as some things will be missed.

It's also funny that utorrent does not follow the announce private flag. which shud stop dht on that torrent, if a tracker reports it as a private.

My thoughts, DHT in utorrent is still incomplete. so is a risk factor on these private torrents sites.

[killer]

here is no such correlation between the size of a client and the number of bugs in it (90KB == problems??). In fact, I'd expect a smaller client to have less bugs than a larger one, seeing as how there's less code. The age of a client is more like what you're trying to get at. Fine, µTorrent is young, so maybe there might be bugs because of that. But size? Nah uh.

Smaller programs doesnt mean less bugs? It might be only 90KB in size, but look at the amount of bug reports in the forum.

Everyone is saying there tracker coding is bad, how was DHT implented in Utorrent in the first place? By reverse engineering another client. You dont expect anything to go wrong with it?

[Firon]

DHT was tested for quite a while with many private betas, thanks. We KNOW how well it works, and it works just fine.

[NiteShdw]

It's also funny that utorrent does not follow the announce private flag. which shud stop dht on that torrent, if a tracker reports it as a private.

My thoughts, DHT in utorrent is still incomplete. so is a risk factor on these private torrents sites.

In this you are mistaken. Open a .torrent with the PRIVATE flag enabled. Double click the torrent in the list to see the Properties window. The checkbox labeled "Enable DHT" will be grayed out. If this is not the case, then the .torrent does not have the PRIVATE flag.

Merged post(s):

Someone REALLY needs to do a good write up for DHT in the Documentation forum because so many people seem to be completely misinformed.

EDIT by silverfire: Please do not double post!

[wiggo]

Sure... utorrent doesnt have peer exchange. So why does it do this. Probaly poor coding. What do you expect from a client 90KB in size, theres bound to be problems with it.

You said you tested with DHT disabled AND enabled. So the problem can't be with the DHT. You claim poor coding, hell yeah, uTorrent is coded so bad so bugs in the code has generated the requested PEER EXCHANGE feature on its own. Damn, this feels scary, like an alien thing, maybe the bugs has created some kind of evil artificial intelligence in the code that start to implement the requested features on its own when the uTorrent user think of the feature.

Damn, this is the worst thing that could happend, in 1 year there will be no more uTorrent and the only version still in existence will be locked into a sealed room at Area 51

[celtic_raven]

somewhat of topic.

but.. i know how tiresome it can be if ppl misunderstand your work,(both tracker and client in this case)

but somehow i doubt name calling back and forth will solve the problem.

or sarcastic comments like wiggo's( tho an ai would be nice in the clients)

why spend all your energy on blaming the other side, and comming up with insults.

if both parties come up with recommendations/solutions things would be so much easier.

no yelling back and forth for days, and ppl can concentrate on what they are supposed/want to do.

thats just my 2 cents.

i just get sick and tired of running into problems and instead of solving them keep running into a name calling contest.

(im not here to attack any one, but the sooner the name calling stops and solutions/ideas get brought forward, the sooner the problem is solved(tracker happy, utorrent dev crew happy))

[inajmi]

im not here to attack any one, but the sooner the name calling stops and solutions/ideas get brought forward, the sooner the problem is solved(tracker happy, utorrent dev crew happy)

i really agree with u. what is it with name callin. y dont the developers have a look at there code once again and y dont the tracker admins have a look at the tracker. there is somethin wrong here it could be the coders end or the trackers end lets find a mutual way and solve this issue....

[celtic_raven]

i didnt mean that ppl have to look at their own coding only.

maybe some have run into this problem before,

maybe the uttorent developers have a solution on tracker level,

maybe the tracker coder has a solution/improvement on client level.

everyone can benefit from that, more then from calling each other names and staying stuck at the same point we are now

[DreadWingKnight]

I've gone through a few torrents on one of the sites in question, and the problems appear to be at least partly the site's fault.

Several flags and values in the torrent metadata that are mutually exclusive with the private flag are being left in some torrents on the site, even though the private flag is being added.

[celtic_raven]

call me a n00b as i dont have any experience in creating a tracker or a client.

so this question might sound stupid.

when you talk about the flags etc in the torrents, is that cause of the way the tracker is coded, or cause of the way the users create the torrent in question???

[DreadWingKnight]

If the torrent site is modifying the torrents at upload time (I get tired of trying to beat the distinction between tracker and torrent site. They are NOT one and the same) then these flags being there is as much the fault of the person making the torrent as it is the person who wrote the editor in the upload script.

[inajmi]

why doesnt any one ask the developer to check the coding he has done instead of just blaming the trackers. man it could be a small mistake on the developers side also. its just a suggestion tht the developer also shld check its coding of utorrent

[Firon]

because ludde already has? didn't you see him respond earlier?

[wiggo]

why doesnt any one ask the developer to check the coding he has done instead of just blaming the trackers. man it could be a small mistake on the developers side also. its just a suggestion tht the developer also shld check its coding of utorrent

It's impossible that it is uTorrents fault since there is no peer exchange in uTorrent. And a peer exchange feature can't be created via bugs.

uTorrent NEVER give its own peerlist to anyone else, it doesn't give ANY peerlist to anyone else. Such a feature is NOT implemented. So therefore it's impossible that it's uTorrents fault that the the "legal" peers are being leaked to "illegal" peers.

Therefore I would recommend the tracker admins to check the coding of thier tracker software and perform more tests.

If the leak STILL only happen when uTorrent is connected to the network. Then there's probably a bug in any of the other clients in the network, and the bug only appear when uTorrent is connected to them.

Another reason might be that BitComet want to give uTorrent a bad reputation, and start to leak peers only when uTorrent is being connected. This might be the reason. But I highly doubt it. But it might be the reason.

The tracker admin have no proof that it's uTorrent that are leaking the peerlist to "illegal" peers. The only thing they "know" is that SOMETHING leak the peerlist to "illegal" peers when uTorrent is connected. And since PEER EXCHANGE follow a protocol, and this protocol is not supported by utorrent, then it's impossible that it's uTorrents fault.

It's like the politicians (the tracker admins) in the city say "We ban people from using this bicycle in the city because it leak two gallons of petrol per mile". And when people say that it's impossible since a bicycle don't carry any petrol, then the politicans respond that "The bicycle is the lightest bicycle in the city, it's manufactured in carbonfiber instead of rusty steel, it only weight 1 kg compared to the other bicyles that weight 10 kg, theres bound to be problems with it, and that has to be the reason why it leak the petrol"...

And people wonder why we get name calling back and forth!? The reason is crystal clear to me. But I don't want to encourage name calling, I just gave you my thoughts. Let's continue with a mature conversation and try to help the tracker admins to solve the problem.

[Firon]

They IP banned me from their site, I get a cute little redirect to google. Why I don't know, I didn't do anything to them. I'd use a proxy to post again but I just don't care enough to. I guess they're so insecure about themselves that they had to ban someone relaying messages between forums to feel better.

[Ultima]

here is no such correlation between the size of a client and the number of bugs in it (90KB == problems??). In fact, I'd expect a smaller client to have less bugs than a larger one, seeing as how there's less code. The age of a client is more like what you're trying to get at. Fine, µTorrent is young, so maybe there might be bugs because of that. But size? Nah uh.

Smaller programs doesnt mean less bugs? It might be only 90KB in size, but look at the amount of bug reports in the forum.

Everyone is saying there tracker coding is bad, how was DHT implented in Utorrent in the first place? By reverse engineering another client. You dont expect anything to go wrong with it?

Please read the entire post before writing. If you didn't understand what I was trying to say, then please don't respond to it. I didn't say that µTorrent didn't have bugs. I didn't even say that it has a little bugs. Hell, I know it has a lot of bugs. But you wanna know why? It's still RELATIVELY NEW. I never said smaller programs have less bugs. I said that smaller programs can be EXPECTED to have less bugs. But that's assuming it has already MATURED WITH AGE. Think about what I just said. If you can't see the reasoning behind my logic, then I really can't help you here.

Also, please don't selectively quote. If you read that entire post, you would have seen that I touched upon the fact that µTorrent's DHT was implemented through reverse engineering of the protocol. In the very same post.

[celtic_raven]

why doesnt any one ask the developer to check the coding he has done instead of just blaming the trackers. man it could be a small mistake on the developers side also. its just a suggestion tht the developer also shld check its coding of utorrent

inajmi how many times have i told you know to keep quiet untill you understand what ppl are talking about,

thanks a lot, just when we had a decent convo going on without name calling you barge in and start acussing ppl again.

[Ares]

EDIT: Resolved, nevermind.

*Gulp* of all the threads I don't particularly want to post in...

Well, I just so happened to have joined this infamous tracker about a week ago. I'm using uTorrent 1.2.1 b3, and it seems to get around the ban. I honestly wasn't aware that it was banned, and I never thought twice, until after much downloading I ended up reading about the banned torrents in the forum. Then I noticed this very thread being discussed in their forums. So then I knew that it was the private tracker everyone has been talking about... 0.o

Anyway, I personally had not experienced this "ghost peers" thing. So I figured if it was indeed a bug, it was fixed in the beta. Until now...

I'm downloading two torrents and seeding another, all from this private tracker. Where my upload speed is slow, my ratio is too slow to allow me to download more than one torrent. Well my queue settings allow me to download two at a time. So I get a tracker error on one, and it does not download. But now, for some reason, it is. Somehow I am downloading with DHT disabled and the tracker not allowing me to connect. I am not putting blame on uTorrent, or this tracker. I honestly don't know. All I know is, I can disconnect from the torrent that is blocked by the tracker, and restart it, and it will still download. DHT is definitely disabled.

So, what do you guys think? Hopefully instead of pointing fingers, we can work together to find out what's wrong...

Screenshot:

http://img337.imageshack.us/my.php?image=utorrenttrackerbug5jd.gif

-Ares

[Ultima]

I agree, there's a lot of needless bashing in this thread.

@wiggo: Your post seems to place the blame this whole problem on everything else but µTorrent, which is a totally bad approach to trying to solve a problem. I think there's still a possibility that µTorrent's at fault, since it isn't without bugs. From what I've read so far, it (unfortunately) seems to be µTorrent's fault, but at this point, we can't really say what's to blame. More solid proof is still needed.

[chaosblade]

Up until now, While reading this thread, I am yet to see any evidence that uTorrent is doing anything wrong. Im also waiting on thebrass' reply on DreadWingKnight's suggestions regarding the metadata's validity.

[Ultima]

I don't know about that... personally, I'd be pretty suspicious if, when I add µTorrent to a swarm, "illegal" peers suddenly connect, but when there's no µTorrent in the swarm, no illegal peers connect.

[wiggo]

I agree, there's a lot of needless bashing in this thread.

@wiggo: Your post seems to place the blame this whole problem on everything else but µTorrent, which is a totally bad approach to trying to solve a problem. I think there's still a possibility that µTorrent's at fault, since it isn't without bugs. From what I've read so far, it (unfortunately) seems to be µTorrent's fault, but at this point, we can't really say what's to blame. More solid proof is still needed.

Of course I blame everything but uTorrent since it's impossible that it's uTorrents fault. If uTorrent had any kind of PEER EXCHANGE feature in it, then I would think that a bug uTorrent was the fault in this case. But since there is NO feature or function in the uTorrent source code that share the peer list, then it's impossible that it's uTorrents fault. A bug can't cause uTorrent to share the peer list, since there's no protocol coded into uTorrent to share the list.

So my approach is not bad at all. I try to give people another point of view. So they can try to find the real problem instead of blaming uTorrent because that is a totally waste of time.

If you still think that uTorrent is the fault. Then explain to me how uTorrent can share the peerlist when there is no feature/function/protocol in uTorrent to share peerlists. And remember, a bug can't automaticly create a peer exchange protocol, code it, and start using it.

So let's try and find the real problem.

[Ares]

EDIT: Resolved, nevermind.

Up until now, While reading this thread, I am yet to see any evidence that uTorrent is doing anything wrong. Im also waiting on thebrass' reply on DreadWingKnight's suggestions regarding the metadata's validity.

Did you see my screenshot? I'm downloading from *this* tracker, even though I am not connected to their tracker. I am not allowed to download more than one at a time, but here I am downloading this other one without being connected to their tracker. And the private flag is set properly, and DHT is disabled.

Now, I admit, I don't know if this is really uTorrent doing anything wrong. But something is wrong... right? I mean, this isn't normal behavior, unless DHT is enabled, right?

-Ares

[Ultima]

@wiggo: I never said that µTorrent was at fault. I said that what the other people from the tracker described seemed to point directly at µTorrent. I said (specifically) that more solid proof is needed. Why should I have to explain myself (or what you're asking)?