Kandinsky

Thank you for your help :)

Update: IPGuard is turned off by default so it doesn't affect anything. I managed to make it work and found the cause: The Bind Address Option. I had it set for my LAN IP (I have 2 network cards). I have now reset it to 0.0.0.0 and it works. BOTTOM LINE: If U used Bind Address: reset it to 0.0.0.0. If you need bind address, find a guru :)

I installed Beta 5 today (upgraded from Beta 4) and after that I couldn't connect to any hub because I was getting this error: "An existing connection was forcibly closed by the remote host". Checked the connection (with the link from the connecton tab) - reported OK, both on TCP and UDP. Reinstalled Beta 4...all working with the same settings. Ideas anyone? Connection type: Firewall with UPnP

I also think one should not FORCE anybody to upgrade. In my case, for some reason, Beta 5 isn't working (can't connect to any hub with the previous settings from beta 4) and I had to reinstall the Beta 4 version. UPDATE: I found out what was wrong....the BIND ADDRESS option. (seems to me it only works with 0.0.0.0). But anyway...one should be able to use the old version if something doesn't work in the new one regardless of the reason (new configuration required, user error, etc.)

The Beta 5 doesn't seem to work with bind address other than 0.0.0.0.

I'll check it again, but from what I remember, I usually had emulation enabled in all the hubs and never encountered the problem with segmented downloading from 1 source only. That's why I still wonder if the implementation is the same as in PeerWeb...or perhaps some new things conflict with the old code... Nevertheless, I think developers should test this matter more thoroughly.

Ok people. After reading these posts, I made a few tests. Seems that Emulate Dcc set on enabled caused the problem. So try not to use emulation and there aren't any problems with segmented downloads when you download () from a single source. I just wish somebody had thought of this sooner :fear: .

Sorry to dissapoint you, but it actually happened to me. I was downloading a movie from a guy (segmented mode - it was driving me mad) and I was interrputed with a "No slot" !!! Still...I don't see why you aren't implementing it like in PeerWeb :)

There was a previous topic in the bugs forum. Basically...what I think he wants (and also me) is that when only 1 source is available there should be normal fast download instead of segemented download. Reasons: lower speed, bigger download time, possibility to lose the slot between recconect..all this if you use segmented download. I don't understand why this has become a problem in ApexDcc while in PeerWeb it was all fine ... Of course...if more sources are available...automatically switch to multi-source segmented downloading.

How about something like that ? So I can download without any interruptions if I have good speed and also to download from more sources. One should have fragmented downloading if there are more sources. What's the point of segment downloading if only download from a single user? I get less speed and also can have the unfortunate chance that another user gets the slot I was using until I reconnect for the next segment. You should consider that previous setting from PeerWebDC, based on the connection type. (if that's the solution to the problem I'm talking about.)