minimum share for clients to be allowed to download from you

murphybob · Post by **murphybob** » 2003-11-28 12:30

I know a lot of hubs implement a minimum share, however I would like to see the client be able to implement a minimum share of their own.

For example, minimum share on hub is 1gb, but I think people should share at least 5gb then I should be able to set something which will not allow anyone sharing less than 5gb to get files off me.
The reason I want this is because the main hub I use (on my university campus) has a share limit of more than 0 bytes, however we get a lot of pisstakers sharing 1 picture of a text file or something, I would like to be able to stop them leeching off me.

I checked the forum and i couldn't see this mentioned so i thought I would propose it.

-murphy

PS obviously your client is the best available which is why i use it, congratulations.

joakim_tosteberg · Post by **joakim_tosteberg** » 2003-11-28 12:57

This could be expoited to easy, just set this to some unreasonable high amount and then no one will be able to download from you.

TheParanoidOne · Post by **TheParanoidOne** » 2003-11-28 13:41

murphybob wrote:For example, minimum share on hub is 1gb, but I think people should share at least 5gb then I should be able to set something which will not allow anyone sharing less than 5gb to get files off me.

If you only want to share you files with people over 5GB, why not go to hubs that have a minimum share of 5GB?

murphybob wrote:The reason I want this is because the main hub I use (on my university campus) has a share limit of more than 0 bytes, however we get a lot of pisstakers sharing 1 picture of a text file or something, I would like to be able to stop them leeching off me.

Wouldn't it make more sense to take your concerns to the hub owner and try to get the minimum changed?

murphybob wrote:I checked the forum and i couldn't see this mentioned so i thought I would propose it.

minimum share limit for other people do dl from me?

If the hub owner will not change the limit, you could also create your own 5GB hub, as mentioned in that thread.

[uu.nl]Konijntjepluis · Post by **[uu.nl]Konijntjepluis** » 2003-12-04 09:59

Some hubs have a feature called blockleechers.
This will allow you to do excactly what you requested.
But you could off course grant everyone their downloads.
One has to start a collection at one point. To you it'll make
no difference who is downloading from you, wether he (or she)
has 100Gb to share or are just

pisstakers sharing 1 picture of a text file or something.

I won't argue that people should share and share and share,
but some people can't (their provider does not aloow it,
limited disk space etc.), but I do think they should be
able to download. Else what's the point in sharing.
I know hubs where everybody shares the same over
and over again, so the result is a high share rate in a
hub but nothing to download.

Be a sport and let all people down from ye,
and just feel proud that you are a great sharer, ok?

ak[lan]dc · Post by **ak[lan]dc** » 2003-12-06 18:17

I'm glad i found this post. Because i was going to start a thread like this.

I would like to claify on what i think the original point was.
First off, University DC Hubs are amazing with real speeds upwards of 1MB/s. However in todays political and legal climate, universitys have two options. (these are in addition to blocking all external connections to internal hubs, which is a huge liability)
option 1: Kill DC
option 2: Let it live without acknowledging its exsistance, which is what my university has unofficially chosen to do.

Now the liability falls on the hub owners. My hub OP's encountered some issues earlier this year. They decided that having a minimum share for the <b>hub</b> was not good for legal purposes.

Now, as new users log on, they do not add shares. Because they are either freeloader, too lazy or dont know how.

Now to get back to the post...

1) It is inefficiant to add ANOTHER hub, since that would divide the universities limited population, more importantly, VERY VERY limited supply of fresh content
2) No hub side limiting software can be used for the reasons above
3) Finally, A client side file share control could not be exploited if you think about it. If a hub has no min share, than i can just remove my shares and that would accomplish the same as setting the min remote share to some ridiculous number. As for hubs WITH a min share, the client should not allow the remote share limit to be set on a hub with min share higher than 0 bytes. This would protect internet hubs from being abused.

I know this will never be implemented since it is not that big of a deal, but would requre alot of changed to the source.

I welcome anyone elses thoughts on this

ak[lan]dc · Post by **ak[lan]dc** » 2003-12-06 18:22

This occured to me right after posting...

The remote limit would have to be a check box like:
---
|_| Allow Zero share users to upload from me.

And that would only work on hubs with a 0 share. Again, this wouldnt affect the internet hubs because there are not really any 0B hubs on the net. And definitly no big hubs with a 0B share.

Norf · Post by **Norf** » 2003-12-07 07:47

Adding a top limit to the min share could solve most of the problems caused by those over zelous people. Ie 10% of max share would do me at least.

ak[lan]dc · Post by **ak[lan]dc** » 2003-12-07 20:42

Not exactly sure what you mean Norf

Post by **GargoyleMT** » 2003-12-08 12:29

The minimum share size for a particular hub is not transmitted to the client.

Anyhow, why not get some CS student to mod DC++ for you? This feature is not meant for mass-consumption.

ak[lan]dc · Post by **ak[lan]dc** » 2003-12-09 14:08

GargoyleMT wrote:The minimum share size for a particular hub is not transmitted to the client.

Good point. That seems to be the only reason that a min remote share for uploading cannot be implemented right now. As i tried to make clear in prvious posts, arbitrary limits would be unfair to everyone.

GargoyleMT wrote: Anyhow, why not get some CS student to mod DC++ for you? This feature is not meant for mass-consumption.

I am a CS student and I am working on it for myself

I just saw the post after i though of the idea and figured i could contribute. Possibly think of a way to implement it so that it could not be abused and maybe be included in a future release. (Since the same functionality can be accomplished in any DC client by removing all your shares in a hub without a min)[/quote]

Post by **GargoyleMT** » 2003-12-11 11:56

ak[lan]dc wrote:I am a CS student and I am working on it for myself
I just saw the post after i though of the idea and figured i could contribute. Possibly think of a way to implement it so that it could not be abused and maybe be included in a future release.

Ah, excellent

Well, see what you come up with, if you find a scheme that you think would work well and prevent abuse.

There's always room for contributing, even if this feature doesn't make it... just look at the RFE tracker on sourceforge.

jbyrd · Post by **jbyrd** » 2003-12-11 16:15

Possibly think of a way to implement it so that it could not be abused and maybe be included in a future release.

Is this really possible? You don't take into account those that have the knowledge of changing the source and changing "10%" to "100%".

Also, it sounds like this would just promote more share faking.

DC++

minimum share for clients to be allowed to download from you

minimum share for clients to be allowed to download from you

Clarification of the subject

Opps! correction...