Posted February 5, 2008 Sorry if duplicated. 1b4, 1b5 makes the hubs to disconnect me on downloads or disconnects itself. It likes as Apex floods the hubs or Apex doesn't keep connections to the hubs. Also it looks as Apex tries to connect to ALL of the got sources (not to first ten of them) every programmed time through all process of download. I can't really understand the nature of this process. I have up to 200 sources at a time. Also "remove all users from the queue", "readd all users to the queue" buttons and "readd users to the queue" list needed. Lists of sources and users it the queue to remove or readd should contain Username (IP, last speed, tag) because if I have 180 sources from all of the world I can't choose the needed ones. If I remove the sources the Apex will find them at the next search and will readd them itself - not a good idea for me. If I manual search alternatives I need a "add user to the queue" button because the automation at this process makes me delete all users again and again one(!) by one at now (1b5). Thank you for your time and sorry for the English. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 7, 2008 Sorry for asking, but as you explain it, are you sure this you are not using some Apex mod? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 7, 2008 Sorry for asking, but as you explain it, are you sure this you are not using some Apex mod? :B That was a great joke. I'm sure. As sure as I can. For example MOD has a ring icon but Apex has a drop icon. Are they? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 7, 2008 How many hubs are you connected to? What speed is your connection? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 8, 2008 How many hubs are you connected to? What speed is your connection? 9 hubs 100Mbit/s full duplex LAN -> 1Gbit/s cuprum -> 1Gbit/s opical -> 1Gbit/s opical -> 10Gbit/s LAN's host Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 8, 2008 So which is it? You connection cannot be 5 different things at once. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 8, 2008 So which is it? You connection cannot be 5 different things at once. My own uplink is 1Gbit/s twisted pare. And I use a 100Mbit/s connection to my own switch at my flat. There is no any troubles with uplink width I think. And there are no any losses in transmission. My switch is made by Asus so there are no problems even here. And my uplink is to a great metronet http://www.netbynet.ru/about_netbynet/net_map_top/ so no problems with tcp transmission. I have a real static LAN IP and I have another real static WAN IP so no any conflicts. All tcp/udp ports are permitted, all routes are sat, and I have "0.0.0.0 if", no wan and "manual forvarding ports" connection at DC properties. But the client loses the connections with the hubs if I have 20-50 sources for my download. If I have 2-3 downloads with 1-10 sources for each, Apex also loses connections to the hubs. It looks like Apex flooding itself, like too much reiterating connections are made again and again overfilling connection tables at the equipment. Does It connect to all souces again and again? Does Apex close the unused connections? I can't understand the nature of the problem. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 11, 2008 also I have found out that the simultaneous file and downloads limitations have no effect over the problem :( Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 12, 2008 I have made some limitations to solve the problem. But the problem is still actual. 2 files at a time 8 downloads no new if speed is over 1024 kBps It's flooding. This is not a good thing if the server has 1Gbps uplink. It likes I can flood a great LAN segment. Did developers read these posts??? Any comments? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 13, 2008 Everything is read, I am sure, we just write when we have what to write. I am sure this is looked at. Yesterday I felt guilty, so I wrote you a comment, but saw how stupid it was and deleted it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted February 13, 2008 I have seen the email from the forum. So I had a great job looking for a reply. :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites