With Bittorrent and its brother BitTornado, getting a file becomes as easy as double clicking on it and choosing where to save. That is pretty easy if you ask me. Now for those with a firewall, there are simple instructions on the BitTornado site. You do need to know how to login to and alter your firewall. I opened a range of ports quite easily on IPCop, which I then disable after I finish getting the torrent and serving for a while.
As for the Starband users problems, we know it is a problem. Ask someone to download an ISO for you like the dialup users do. It took about 20-30 minutes for me to get Xandros last night. A few minutes to burn. Hope I remember that part when I get home.
As was discussed on IRC, it would be nice if the FTP would fail over to torrent if the server has more than a certain amount of requests, but at the least, the tracker could come from the same location as the ISO. It is useful that at least the links to ftp and torrent are usually on the same webserver page.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oren Beck [email protected] 10/05/04 02:00PM >>>
Sadly the concept of blaming the user is easier than making things simply work . Making things work simply is the truly non-trivial part we often forget about .
Your idea of an alternate protocol is quite well advised . If no other reason than to allow the early adopters some way to GET the Torrent software itself .
Even then alternate protocols are smart due to some of us not easily adopting Torrent for several reasons . Forgetting * any* software issues being the problem what then of us on connections totally unfriendly to Torrent. For example Starband and other upload speed restricted users . The core concept of Torrent was never in doubt , it's the deploying that needs work .
What is very disturbing to me is that certain un-named players seem to be profiteering on the altar of Torrent ! Charging someone $ 10 for a HTTP download but free as Torrent seems quite extreme . Not mentioning those who as above are disadvantaged in access to Torrent for whatever reason .
I could even understand a priority launch of Torrent seeding to FTP or HTTP sites on day zero as Slashdot effect prevention by load balancing thru redundancy in mirrors -THAT seems a good Torrent use .
Brian Kelsay
Brian Kelsay wrote:
With Bittorrent and its brother BitTornado, getting a file becomes as easy as double clicking on it and choosing where to save. That is pretty easy if you ask me. Now for those with a firewall, there are simple instructions on the BitTornado site. You do need to know how to login to and alter your firewall. I opened a range of ports quite easily on IPCop, which I then disable after I finish getting the torrent and serving for a while.
Okay, I continue to glean useful hints, and actual instruction, by opening kclug mail ... and curiosity overcomes total laziness. Besides, I just bothers me to use Windows to latch onto a Linux distro ISO torrent to feed to my finicky laptop.
After reinstalling Azureus (azureus-2.1.0.4-0.gbv.3.i586.rpm ... using SUSE 9.1 PRO), I received "NAT Error" when testing my setup with the config wizard ... after checking a couple of router "how to" sites, it seemed that I perhaps needed to adjust my router settings. Like, maybe enable UPnP? I still did not know for sure, so I toyed with it a bit.
Enabling UPnP had no effect; however, all is well after disabling the SUSE firewall (DUH?) ... Azureus opens little info windows, indicating which ports are being opened, and for what purposes, and it just works, regardless of whether I have checked, or unchecked the UPnP box in my router setup.
... SO, do I "need" the SUSE firewall on the desktop when I am using a Linksys BEFSR41 router??? Is there a reasonable, rational and sane option between "on" and "off"?
And yes, for the little I actually download, ftp could be just fine; but sometimes these things are just too fun to ignore, and I am sure that many of us home / home-office users flip a few bucks to developers from time to time, just to say thanks for NOT being Microsoft ... which still has not paid me my part of the 1.1 billion dollar CA class-action settlement ... I think it was around $17.00 in the form of some kinda mickey mouse voucher. Oops ... rant.
Richard A. Franklin wrote:
After reinstalling Azureus (azureus-2.1.0.4-0.gbv.3.i586.rpm ... using SUSE 9.1 PRO), I received "NAT Error" when testing my setup with the config wizard ... after checking a couple of router "how to" sites, it seemed that I perhaps needed to adjust my router settings. Like, maybe enable UPnP? I still did not know for sure, so I toyed with it a bit.
Enabling UPnP had no effect; however, all is well after disabling the SUSE firewall (DUH?) ... Azureus opens little info windows, indicating which ports are being opened, and for what purposes, and it just works, regardless of whether I have checked, or unchecked the UPnP box in my router setup.
... SO, do I "need" the SUSE firewall on the desktop when I am using a Linksys BEFSR41 router??? Is there a reasonable, rational and sane option between "on" and "off"?
The answer is "probably not." If your network looks like this:
.-----. .---------. | You |----| Linksys |---- The Internet `-----' `---------'
and the Linksys is configured for NAT then it's probably blocking any bad inbound traffic before the SuSE firewall sees it. The option between "on" and "off" would be "on, but with the UPnP port opened manually."
-
Brian Kelsay -
Gerald Combs -
Richard A. Franklin