PPK

I don't need to test that, others do that already (emtee for example). p2p nat traversal is easy to code, but his support is bad (for example zyxel don't support it at all, in cisco/linksys is support in 86 % of devices... when you count all nats then support is around 60-70 %). It can be increased with using UDP hole punching instead of TCP hole punching, because UDP have much better support (more than 90%). Then it will be really "works almost in all cases" I'm sure that you know skype where is it used, and it is always not enough so they need to use active user in middle for pasive - pasive connection when nat travesal fail. If you want it that that way... then you should use original documentation and not reverse-engineered one for something that is correctly documented from his creator (Ade is his name if you don't know... and original documentation using word "can" is here) And in case when you really read it, maybe you should read documentation for ADCGET too... partial filelist is ADC only feature as it is multiple times mentioned in DC++ changelog Then i don't understand why you complains... then it must working in nmdc without need to have ip from hub :rolleyes:

In ADC you don't need any setting on hub software. Main problem is that both users who want to make passive - passive connection must be passive because they are behind NAT and this NAT must support p2p NAT Traversal... in many cases passive - passive connection is not working because this requirement is not met. Now are you joking are are you really not able to read ? UserIP and UserIP2 are protocol extensions. Extensions that are not created by NMDC developer. Extensions that are not reverse engineered because they are both documented from beginning and for both is documentation available. And "should" is not "must" ... And if you are really unhappy with not working UserIP2 (you don't use UserIP without that 2) you can always get IP in many other ways.. easy way is when client is "calling home" for update file, or for dht bootstrap file ;)

You are wrong (as always), please read existing documentation for UserIP/UserIP2 protocol extension... then you will find that hubs don't violate anything :P

Are you sure ? Because PtokaX not checking Key when client is using EXTENDEDPROTOCOL (sending $Supports to hub) :P

Why should hub block any port usage (protocol allow whole port range to be used) because some clients show annoying message to users ? Hub is responsible for ip checking in commands, that is important... not ports :rolleyes:

This message is shown when someone in active mode is using port 80 or port 2501. It is annoying message with false information, mostly because user don't set static port number and his client generated port 2501 on startup :rolleyes:

It was nothing personal from my side, toast give wrong info about ports and i'm corrected that. 1 ) i'm not unemployed. 2 ) trolling everywhere without creating anything and without any knowledge is what you do. 3 ) i'm developing dc++ based client from spring 2002 and BM used is as base for his client (original name of Strongdc++ was BigCZDC++, but of course you are dc newbie and don't know that), and my code is used by StrongDC++ and his mods. 4 ) it was not epic failure, it was funny to see StrongDC++ project removed from sourceforge for week when all what BM needed to do was to send one email to get it back without explaining anything :lol:

If your ISP is throttling dc communication you can't avoid that by different ports. Enabling TLS is only way how to avoid that, but of course if isp is not throttling TLS connections too. If you want play with ports then try something from range 1025 to 32761 (higher ports not working with all clients). TCP and UDP can have same port number, TLS must have another port than TCP. And don't listen to Toast, he don't know basics like that max port is 65535 :)

I don't think that i'm said that StrongDC segmented downloading is stupid, because there was never any StrongDC segmented downloading. You like to saying that something that you don't created is yours. You stated first time when you was on dc dev public that you created segmented downloading and you like to saying that again and again. You don't created segmented downloading, you copy/pasted it from ReverseConnect and when DC++ gets segmented downloading then you replaced ReverseConnect one with that from DC++. I'm sure you don't replaced it only for fun, but because old one was really bad or stupid as you wrote that i'm said ? :stuart:

If you want to play it with that way then your whole TypedTreeListView using common methods and nothing else :stuart: So you can't hold copyright for that, you want to apply it that way over my code then you should do that for your own code too It is too easy to check MagnetDialog in CZDC++ and ReverseConnect to see that they are very different. Your own changelog state more things that you copy/pasted but you ignored that. Your way with something that can't be copyrighted is wrong. For you is everything few lines, you are not able to check things properly. You think that everything (maybe PtokaX too? ) is developed by copy/paste, but you are wrong. And that is another evidence that you are totally wrong. CzDC don't use WTL, do you think that whole wtl (1.5 MB of code) can be replaced with few simple lines ? When i join PtokaX project it was coded with using borland components, borland AnsiString, core can't work without gui because gui was settings. Do you think that this was possible to replace that with few simple lines to be possible to run that without gui as windows service ? Or it is possible to replace all that used borland and winapi things with few simple lines to be possible to compile and run PtokaX on non-windows platforms ? Maybe you think that but then.. you must be really different Your DMCA Counter-Notification that you sent to sourceforge contains link to your site with CzDC source and OpenSSL allowing license and after that link is that other copies with same license "can be found via google". Or maybe you don't remember that too ? :w00t: Applying your own logic over your code as you doing it with my code -> Code with common methods that can't be copyrighted with you From FlowLib changelog It is not flows idea as you always saying If you don't noticed it is GNU GPL, not FSF GPL. GNU statement is absolutely clear and you can't discuss it. When you contact them they will point you to important sentence in their GNU GPL faq. That faq is available online and important part is http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLIncompatibleLibs with important sentence "In either case, you should put this text in each file to which you are granting this permission." But i will give you two choices, both are bad for you but one make you happy because in that one statement is valid. First choice is that this exception statement is invalid and you can't use my code. Second choice is that this exception statement is valid -> it is license violation -> you have nothing allowing you to use that code at all :lol:

Ok, but then you need to start with DC++ and request improvement. I seen hub sending $ConnectToMe PPK hub-address-to-attack.no-ip.com:411| and DC++ that address in command where must be only IP resolved and helped with attack Another DC++ thing is (i'm not sure if it was not fixed in some 0.7xx) that DC++ allow unlimited connections to same ip and port.. again that helping in attacks :stuart:

You looked on yourself ? Because that is exactly what you do. You said that you don't copy/pasted country flags from CZDC++, i'm showed line from your own changelog where you wrote that you have that from CZDC++. You wrote that CZDC++ have tabs always on bottom, everyone can check that you are wrong. When you wanted to have openssl exception for CZDC+ you upload source with that exception to your own website. You totally ignore one line in license is not correct way to give that exception, because from that is not visible where it apply (remember that CzDC source contains code under other licenses than GNU GPL), you don't even noticed that CzDC can't allow openssl simply because use DC++ code that don't have that exception and adding OpenSSL exception to CzDC will result in GNU GPL violation. You reduce any feature that you copy/pasted from CZDC++ to one or two lines of code, it is easy to check that you are wrong in search for alternates reporting and more wrong in Pause/Resume search button. I understand your point and you are right. I'm trying to show that something is wrong with that. When Big Muscle wanted to show CzDC source with OpenSSL exception in license he don't simply point to any website where it is. He instead upload it to his own website. Linus Torvalds said "Only wimps use tape backup: real men just upload their important stuff on ftp, and let the rest of the world mirror it ".Big Muscle shown that CzDC is mirrored, so mirror with CzDC source with OpenSSL exception in license must exist. But when he used that source first time and said that google can find other sites where it is then i'm tried that and google failed and don't found any sites :stuart: As Big Muscle said PtokaX is easy to crash, so it should be easy to crash these hubs. But really if they use PtokaX for this in hard way (external bots ? why when there is many easier ways). Worse is that if they want to do that you can't do anything. If hub software don't have option to disable ip check then they hexedit it's binary to remove that (PtokaX have many hexedited versions ). And if they don't hexedit it then they will simply compile their own version from source (closed source is not option for multi-platform software).

Only one website have CzDC source with that license, and it is your website. When you created that fake you was not able to do that correctly and copy correct CzDC files naming convention. You was not able to show any other website with that source. So yes it is problem when you copy something because you have nothing that is allowing you to use my code with OpenSSL. You know what web archive is ? If not you should use google. It is where is possible to see archived CzDC website from 28 february and few other times after. Not all of them contains CzDC binary and source files but when they do then they don't contains anything about OpenSSL in license :whistling: Btw you are funny how you always try to change things. When you failed with that is is not my code you tried that you don't copy/pasted my code, now you trying again version that only you have You can't win that, you can't change history, you can't change evidence and even you can try you are not smart enough :lol:

I don't do that. Only created button don't do anything and that is not this case. You don't remember. Yes there was really used magnet link code from RevConnect, but after DC++ added magnet link support all RevConnect code was removed and DC++ magnet link code improved (added file size to magnet links and adding to queue). When you wrote that changelog line then you know that, why else you will wrote CZDC++ if it was RevConnect code ? You don't need to, you already prove how stupid you are. You are only who is saying that is not code created by me. You think when most of people here are dc newbies (compare to me or others who leave us ) that you can tell lies because most of them was not here and don't know how it really was. I know, it is only thing that is in my client from your. You are proud of that because you was able to create one things that deserved to be copy/pasted. Ok, i will make you happy and fix that :whistling:

If you don't notice that is decoding table with 676 code elements. If i remember correctly country names and country codes in CZDC++ are under 250 elements. Do you think that someone is insane and create that from that decoding table when real ISO 3166-1 code lists is http://www.iso.org/iso/country_codes/iso_3166_code_lists/english_country_names_and_code_elements.htm ? Do you know that it is asy to check this that you are wrong ? Option to show tabs on top is in CZDC++ at least 5 years and you copy/pasted that. I don't know what you see or what you mean, is easy to say "you said something on some place" when nobody can check that. Original yes, but what you copy/pasted was far far away from original. You like to point that something is from code project. Yes emoticons use imagedataobject from codeproject and original author is in files (you removed him). But that is one of 3 parts that emoticons need. You need part in chatctrl and you need AGEmotionSetup (i'm sure that you don't have idea why AGE). You have crazy idea how things are created. You really think that you copy/paste something and it will be something else ? It is not, he found few lines related to tree handling. Few lines from hundreds lines that my version have.