O.K. So I have read plenty of messages that should convince anyone that this morpheus thing is a real problem. I have had all the same frustrations shared earlier. Why havent I read anything about a pending solution? I have been thrilled with Limewire but I am now afraid that it will be useless soon. Why havent we heard from Limewires creators about a solution??

We are working on grouping LimeWire Ultrapeers more tightly to solve a few problems. We have found that 94% of traffic on a LimeWire Ultrapeer is non-LimeWire traffic. There are a lot of nasty clients <and perhaps others> out there effectively spamming the network.

I have a few more longer term solutions in mind but tight grouping should at least improve the local network in the short term.

Thanks
-greg

Thank you very much for this reply.
I really hope that your grouping plan is implemented soon and works well.
I am interested in your comment about so much of the traffic being non-limewire. Isnt this the best reason to develop "filters" or some other software device to frustrate this other traffic? If the solution was issued as a upgrade to "pro", I think it is safe to say that those of us using the software (and the network) daily, would line up tp pay for the fix now that it is apparant that the whole thing is in jepordy.

Fscott

Another thought..
I have a cble connection ans several Mac's at home. I could wipe anything important from one of them and leave it on 24/7.
If you could verify enough individuals willing, like me, you perhaps could build a backbone of people to establish filters on.
I admit, I really dont know what Im talking about here, but my point is (as was mentioned elswhere in the forum) this is a community and there may be others out here willing to be part of the solution....
Fscott

I think that what gbildson said should NOT be done, that will lead to the segmentation of gnutella, and can break the network. None peer should be treated differently. Also Morpheus is not that bad, most of it's problems is that it wont count well the number of hosts, by reducing the amount of pongs. But it is based on Gnucleus, and Gnucleus is an excelent client that takes very little bandwith, and does a great job as ultrapeer. I think the best ultrapeers are Limewire and Gnucleus (thus also includes Morpheus).
Also take it positively, Morpheus brings Gnutella a greater userbase, so you will be able to find more files.
By the way I don't use any of those. I use Shareaza, which is great.

At some point Gnutella will definitely need a way to block spammers/spoofers.

This should be built into the protocol - ignoring certain IP addresses for a few hours and propagation of those banned addresses among ultrapeers.

Without this, Gnutella will die within six months as all the results returned will be useless - either porn spam or RIAA fakes.

I have been noticing that when the "Total Files" (in the Statistics Window) goes down, I look at my connections and over half of them will be Morpheus. I keep 10 connections up. But my search results go way down. Now, as it stands, we have to enter each and every IP address to block them, right? Is there, or will there be, a way to block Vendors instead of just IP addresses?
Thanks.

It goes down, because Morpheus/Gnucleus don't waste your bandwith, just to tell you how many hosts are there.

Thanks but, I'm not concerned with how many hosts (total) are there. My problem is that the number of files/results go way down when there are alot of Morpheus hosts.

No one would even bother to look at the hosts total if there were not a problem with search hits. This is a fact unchanged by your admiration for Morpheus as a Gnutella client.

However, I have noticed that Morpheus ultrapeers need to "cook" a lot longer than Limewire. If I leave Limewire on all night, then in the morning there are usually nothing but Morpheus ultrapeers left. If I do a search, I get the usual number of hits.

But who wants to wait eight hours or so to get decent search results?