Is it possible not to allow one user to upload twice?

FleetCmd · Post by **FleetCmd** » 2003-12-19 07:05

It would be great to find a solution in order to a user couldn't upload from me twice.
Since I'm an OP, i have different prefixes on different hubs. So if someone who uploads from me and she/he has the "Automatically search for alternative" option turned on, he will find the "other me" on the other hub, and since the nick name is different, dcpp adds the source automatically. It would be nice if would be an option not to allow users upload twice from the same ip with the same nick.

Thanks

FleetCmd · Post by **FleetCmd** » 2003-12-19 08:21

(i made a screenshot just for whatever reason

)

Blippo · Post by **Blippo** » 2003-12-21 14:18

Just out pf curiosity. Is that a bandwith limiting client you are using?

I personally think that bandwith limiting would be great, say I could limit my 2 mbit at connection at work to use at most 1 mbit.

But is your limit set at 8 kb? Yikes, I'd hate to download from anyone at that rate!

Twink · Post by **Twink** » 2003-12-21 16:16

yeah 3 slots at 8KB seems a bit low. Thou I guess some people dont have alot of speed, my top upload speed is like 16KB

FleetCmd · Post by **FleetCmd** » 2003-12-22 04:09

Blippo wrote:Just out pf curiosity. Is that a bandwith limiting client you are using?

I personally think that bandwith limiting would be great, say I could limit my 2 mbit at connection at work to use at most 1 mbit.

But is your limit set at 8 kb? Yikes, I'd hate to download from anyone at that rate!

Yes, that's right.. My limit is 8 k.. This is why I have only 3 slots.. I forgot to check what country you are from, but here (in Hungary) the "DSL" means 384/64 or 512/128 kbit per sec connection for $47 (Ã¢â€šÂ¬40)/month. I have 384/64, so it's not hard to calculate that 64/8 = 8 kB/sec, and I must set the limit if don't want to my download go down to 6-8 kB..
So If you own a correct ISP, don't hesitate, come here, I will be your first customer

So this is why I don't want one people upload twice, because this way the users don't get equal speed...

ivulfusbar · Post by **ivulfusbar** » 2003-12-22 05:34

Your screenshot doesn't show what you think it shows. It only shows two users with the same nickname downloading from you on two different hubs. You don't know that the users are the same.. you only assume it due the same nickname. ,))

FleetCmd · Post by **FleetCmd** » 2003-12-22 06:06

ivulfusbar wrote:Your screenshot doesn't show what you think it shows. It only shows two users with the same nickname downloading from you on two different hubs. You don't know that the users are the same.. you only assume it due the same nickname. ,))

I know how to get the IP (in addition i'm op on one of the two hubs), and if I weren't, that's not hard to get the ip..

So you can sure, that they are the same. This is why I wrote in the first post that all the following conditions should be fulfilled:
- the same nick
- and the same ip

TheNOP · Post by **TheNOP** » 2003-12-22 08:24

in my opinion, if this is to be implimented, it should test for same IP only, not IP and nick.
a user can easely have different nicks in different hubs.

ivulfusbar · Post by **ivulfusbar** » 2003-12-22 09:16

still, same IP, same ShareSize, same IP doesn't mean they are the same. ;))

ivulfusbar · Post by **ivulfusbar** » 2003-12-22 09:17

TheNOP wrote:in my opinion, if this is to be implimented, it should test for same IP only, not IP and nick.
a user can easely have different nicks in different hubs.

Same IP is not possible since many users are behind NAT, for example in some hubs 10-50 users have the same IP.

Post by **GargoyleMT** » 2003-12-22 12:16

Yup, this is why most (DC) replacement protocols feature a GUID.

In particular, there are some universities in Sweden where users are passive, because they're NATing out through 3 or 4 (or even 1) IP. Testing by IP and nick is still a guess, though it may seem quite concrete.

TheNOP · Post by **TheNOP** » 2003-12-22 21:10

i tough GUID was for hub to hub linkage...
i realise it could also be use for filtering users.

there are some universities in Sweden where users are passive, because they're NATing out through 3 or 4 (or even 1) IP.

not only in Sweden

but we are not talking to bloc same IP at hub level here, only at client level.
so only one client from that LAN will be able to dl from same other client at same time.
peoples within a LAN while accessing hubs inside their LAN won't be affected.

it's only a mather of witch happen more often...
allowing same user dl more that one file from a user.
or force "possibly" several LAN users to wait a bit longer for a dl.

Post by **GargoyleMT** » 2003-12-22 23:33

TheNOP wrote:i tough GUID was for hub to hub linkage...
i realise it could also be use for filtering users.

Well, one potential replacement is: http://murdoc.extatic.org/dctng.html

but we are not talking to bloc same IP at hub level here, only at client level.
so only one client from that LAN will be able to dl from same other client at same time.

Bleh.