Cant use DC++ properly anymore

I

iburstuser

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
126
Reaction score
0
Does anyone else have this problem?

I get the "Connecting" message followed by the "Connection timeout" message whenever I try to connect to someone or download a file.

My UTD settings are all as per this forum and iBurst recommendations. This is not a firewall/access point issue. It used to work like a charm until January.

Does anyone else have this problem? Is packet shaping in effect?
 
I also have trouble connecting to most hubs. In fact, I cannot get connected in most cases.
 
iburstuser said:
Does anyone else have this problem?

I get the "Connecting" message followed by the "Connection timeout" message whenever I try to connect to someone or download a file.

My UTD settings are all as per this forum and iBurst recommendations. This is not a firewall/access point issue. It used to work like a charm until January.

Does anyone else have this problem? Is packet shaping in effect?
Click to expand...

mhhh... another p2p thread.

The question is are u leeching or sharing? Maybe thats why u r being denied the download access! Just a thought!
 
if you are an active user, go to www.whatismyip.org and replace that number with the one at the IP bar in options under connection settings. If its the same and no chenge needed, well then I dunno :/
 
Last edited:
Same

Also noticing that DC++ has just about ceased to be able to be used.

The people and techies at IBurst better realise the following VERY simple thing:

Once their service 'officially launches' and I'm paying full rates for 'internet access' (with the 3 gig cap in place) - I better not have ANY trouble with DC++ or ANY other P2P application.

If Im paying for 'internet' - its my business how I use up my cap.

I can understand at the moment, their desperate attempts to reduce bandwidth usage - BUT the instant their service starts - the f*ckwits better open up P2P usage and leave it up to their customers to use up their caps as they see fit.

If they don't - I recommend immediate cancellations all round.

Anything else is a scam. I'm not paying R600 a month for a service thats only allowing me http + ftp up to 3 gigs. And you shouldn't either.

If theres a 3 gig cap, and if I want to use it up in 24hrs, with whatever appz I use, thats my business.

So I can more-or-less accept their fairly irritating blocking of the popular tools that many use on the Net, for now.

NOT when their service 'officially' starts, along with the cap.

And just as an anarchist thought, seeing as IBurst are blocking one after another layer of the appz we all use, so that they don't have to pay as much for bandwidth - for the folks who want to spank IBurst and use http to suck lots of bandwidth from them, and make them pay even more - I recommend a number of the local 'game demo' places - and getting a nonstop download of the 1gig files for Half Life 2 setup files.

I find downloading that at least once or more, every day, makes up for the irritation they gave me first with blocking torrents, and now DC++ - so that they understand that dangling a currently 'uncapped' service in front of me, while blocking what they think are the main methods for 'excessive' downloads, just doesn't work.

The sooner they start their service, uncapped and all P2P appz unblocked, the sooner their bandwidth usage might actually go down a little.

Perhaps if you want to help spank IBurst, find your own http and/or FTP daily ongoing download method, to demonstrate how b/w can be soaked up just as much, by regular usage, as by P2P.

What are they going to do then? Block http/ftp? I don't think so..

They now have more and more of the tiger by the tail - and a little over a month to clearly show us that they'll let go, and behave themselves..

I hear their radio ads starting, so they clearly figure that the system is stable enough to begin to market to the mass audience..

As a sidethought, using Ye Olde Sentech-Gained wisdom - has anyone worked out methods to send a mass-mail to every one of their customers, if we should need to?

I think it might be fun to idly experiment in advance, for ways of doing a 'Hi, here's an online forum to help you' message - just so that unlike Sentech at first, IBurst face a LARGE community of customers all swapping information and news, from the beginning..

- General L. GunMan
 
Last edited:
LoneGunman said:
If Im paying for 'internet' - its my business how I use up my cap.

....

Anything else is a scam. I'm not paying R600 a month for a service thats only allowing me http + ftp up to 3 gigs. And you shouldn't either.
Click to expand...
Actually thats exactly what you're paying for, didn't you do any research before you got it? The plan is to shape all ports except the ussual ftp + http etc. It's not a scam seeing as how this was the plan all along. If you're tech savvy, there are ways around it. Anyways iBurst are only balancing the scales to benifit other customers, so I dont think you should take the "I want to download a bazillion songs and movies and screw everyone else" approach.
 
well there's 'shaping' and theres 'shaping' - I want internet access to do whatever I want to do online, up to a 3 gig limit - and if iBurst are stupid enough to have a whole range of limits + the 3 gig cap - then watch how fast I deprive them of a monthly payment, and move onto another ISP. Their loss.

And as for you saying "I dont think you should take the "I want to download a bazillion songs and movies and screw everyone else" approach.

Thats not what I was saying. Focus. I want to use the internet connection to download whatever I WANT to download, UP to the 3 gig limit.

No more, no less.

That's reasonable - and what I want to do. That's hardly 'taking the bandwidth from other users'. (Odd that you're using logic that iBurst/Sentech use - as opposed to seeing that I simply want that 3 gig freedom, to use in whatever way I choose.)

And for now, the conscious use of http to pull a gig or two each day, is hardly going to deprive anyone of anything - while at the same time, making sure that iBurst don't discover the concept of making 'fake' profit from deliberately depriving b/w from its users.
Something that Sentech did and still does.

As iBurst are not specifying in their advertising that this 'reasonable expectation' (of the freedom to use the Internet to download up to 3gigs worth each month, of whatever the user wants) is not actually possible - then there's a whole bunch of fun coming for them, from new signup customers that were not informed of this.

I'm quite content to walk away from iBurst and get ADSL, or some other option. I've got nothing invested in them, except some money I paid for the modem. No big deal. Its small change.

It'd be nice if iBurst succeed, but *shrugs* - I'm not their family - I'm a customer, that's all. If they continue to suck once they charge full rates and are 'officially launched'. I'm gone, and I'm sure a lot of others will do the same.

Thanks Sentech, for teaching me the correct approach to ISP's :)
 
Last edited:
Even though the terms of the I-Go-anywhere package states which traffic will or will not be shaped, I have to agree with LoneGunMan on this. Why shape the traffic AND apply a cap? They should do either one or the other, not both.

Perhaps when they pull their finger out and announce some customised packages, users will be able to juggle their own shaping and caps. At the moment, this one package fits all approach is doomed to failure.
 
yeah ok traffic shaping + cap is messed up, I use p2p myself, so yeah its not ideal. But I'm not capped yet and I left my crystal ball in my other pants, so we'll have to wait and see.
 
slimothy said:
...so I dont think you should take the "I want to download a bazillion songs and movies and screw everyone else" approach.
Click to expand...
SLimbo, are you not the same iBurster that's been vampirously consuming 60GB..90GB per month all on your own & by your own admission?
 
Lonegunman. You have a very valid point. What i dont understand is, as someone involved in communication, you decline wbs's offer of communicating that same point directly to their management.
 
:confused: Could it be true - you do not want to help WBS resolve their network & customer service problems...?

Why is it that iBursters who know they can solve all of WBS' problems have not already met with WBS, offered their services & resolved everything...?
 
Daveogg said:
Lonegunman. You have a very valid point. What i dont understand is, as someone involved in communication, you decline wbs's offer of communicating that same point directly to their management.
Click to expand...
It's very simple, really. Sucktech taught early adopters on this forum a lesson in how easy it is to be abused by a new provider. The wariness and caution is therefore justified, irrespective of whether one is involved in the same sector or not. It's critical not to lose sight of the fact that the ultimate objective of the parties involved actually differs - it's a 'push/pull' situation, until a happy medium is eventually reached. As I've said elsewhere, the trick is to preclude the 'push/pull', by bringing-in another vector - beneficiation of a 3rd party, and everybody then wins, including a worthy/needy cause. There's no free lunch here, and I doubt very much whether open, honest communication can be established without a common, mutual objective. And don't tell me that both the users and the provider of the service have a common objective in ensuring that the service works properly - WBS are in the business firstly for profit, nothing else, whereas users want the service they originally signed up for. These objectives would appear to be inherently conflicting, given the 'bandwidth management' actions of WBS, the intended cap, and so on...
 
Really all i want is for someone to take up their offer and tell them directly that the idea of a cap AND port shaping is stupid either or but not both and lets hear their response. Not how clever we all are and how we can fix your problems etc. Just as users of your service this is what we want, what are you going to do about it??
 
I have a feeling that they know all this, and they're seeing how far they can go before complaints start flooding and/or they lose customers. (Of course I could be both paranoid and wrong :)

But currently given that they're operating behind the cover of the excuse of 'we haven't officially launched yet' - and given that this Shaun Green and other personnel are on the forum regularly, a fairly simple way of communicating with iBurst is as follows:

Make a thread called 'Dear Iburst Management' and let everyone treat that specific thread as the equivalent of a personal letter to Thami/Sassan and the other higher ups at iBurst - in other words - short, clinical staements from customers, to the Company, without any name-calling or silliness.

Then let everyone alert the various higher-up folks, and the Shaun Greens, to the thread, and ask him and others to please address these assorted valid concerns by paying customers, and/or forward these concerns to upper management..

Just a thought. I'll start the thread, and let's see if it can become a useful way for Management to read letters addressed to them - without the letters or personal contact needed to be 'reported back' to the forum..

It can also stand as a useful record of customers perspectives, especially for the new folks who are going to be arriving on the forum soon.
(iBurst radio adverts are playing on a regular basis, at least on 702 Radio, if not other stations as well - so the marketing has begun. To coincide with this, there'll also be a nice solid positive mention for this forum, in the online Mail and Guardian, in the coming week, just to help alert potential new iBurst customers to this Forum.

So as iBurst increases its marketing drive - maybe now's the time for forumites to reach out and look for fun ways to spread this forum's address - to gather up the new iBurst customers and give them a place to find out (like us) what's actually going on, on a regular basis.
 
Nomination: Idea of the week

LoneGunman said:
So as iBurst increases its marketing drive - maybe now's the time for forumites to reach out and look for fun ways to spread this forum's address - to gather up the new iBurst customers and give them a place to find out (like us) what's actually going on, on a regular basis.
Click to expand...
I love this idea. I'll be posting an article about MyBroadband as a follow-up to the article I posted on i-Burst (Which, back in January, was a very positive one. I can't count how many hits I was referred from search engines with "iburst" in the search criteria. :rolleyes: ).

/me starts looking for logos to use.
 
ic said:
SLimbo, are you not the same iBurster that's been vampirously consuming 60GB..90GB per month all on your own & by your own admission?
Click to expand...
yeah but its different when its me
 
Since the weekend, Shareaza P2P has been flying. Don't know whether WBS has done anything, but I just downloaded a 77MB file in under 10 minutes, at 110-130KB/s. Last week I was only getting occasional bursts up to 20-30KB/s.

Has anybody else noticed anything different? Of course, it might just be a popular file with more peers to download from. Either way, no sign of any port shaping.

I downloaded a 750MB torrent yesterday. Has anyone else used Shareaza as a Torrent client? I was quite impressed.
 
Must say I have had no trouble with DC++ - it seems to be going even better since the weekend.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X