Bearshare 2 block Xolox
 

What do Xolox users think of Bearshare's Vinnie Falcos latest offering to the Gnutella network?

" I am considering blocking Xolox users from downloading off BearShare 2.4.0 users.
I figure, since Xolox is not in active development, we should discourage its use."


Note that Bearshare users will still be able to leech off Xolox users,yet Xolox will not be able to download off Bearshare.


More info @ http://www.bearshare.net/forum/showt...&threadid=8616

Re: Bearshare 2 block Xolox
 

CycloCide

I remember you saying on these forums a while ago that if one Gnutella client actively blocks another Gnutella client then Gnutelliums would no longer continue to host or support the blocking client in question.Is this still the case?
I'm sure that Gnutelliums/Gnutella Forums still hold Xolox in high regard because for one thing this (Xolox)forum is still here despite Xolox being officially discontinued a good while ago.


Bullet

more info
 

Vinnie is opening up this topic for conversation, to solicit user opinions. Xolox repeated queries are bad for the network, which is true.

But that does not mean that he has actually implemented the block... It is still under discussion, so feel free to come over to the bearshare forums and defend your position!

http://www.bearshare.net/forum/showt...?threadid=8616

Re: more info
 

As I type, Vinnie Falco has decided against blocking,enough said.

Re: more info
 

I'm not saying that you are wrong,but please back up your statement,bearing in mind that most major Gnutella clients are/will be implementing automated repeat queries.

Re: more info
 

I wonder why never an other developer posted a topic how "bad" Xolox is! The only source for this is Vinnie - and we all know what Vinnie is thinking about Xolox...

Morgwen

it's wrong
 

Xolox is a Gnutella client like all the rest. BearShare is being monopolistic by blocking Xolox clients. It's wrong.

Vinnie's argument is that Xolox is flooding the network with search requests. Why not? Xolox works! Other clients should be more aggressive like Xolox is. If they are so concerned, they should simply code their clients to limit the traffic they route.

Personally, I think Vinnie just wants to phase Xolox out. Good luck!

What happens if someone modifies these bytes in the xolox.exe file:
Offset 879096(in my copy):
User-Agent: www.XoloX.nl

That's what xolox sends to other users. I think it isn't that easy to identify gnutella clients.

What you want to do is look for the hex 0D 0A end of line characters and just make them come after the hex 20 (space) so that it's a blank user agent line.
Screw vinnie, he can't control gnutella anymore cause morpheus gnucleus took over.
Now we have a open source major gnutella client, suck eggs vinnie!

Is there anyway we could have some sort of "bot" that could retreive info about who's connecting us.?

This way we could use a firewall to block bearshare users.

Just a thought.

i just located all the HTTP header info in XoloX


GNUTELLA CONNECT/0.4
get /get/
HTTP/1.0
User-Agent: www.XoloX.nl
Referer: Gnutella

it would not be hard for me to change that to something totally different.

i could also check BearShare's connection info and possibly mimic it for each release they do. (no promisses though- it might not be possible)

i could change that stuff, and release a 1.16 client of both my Xenomorph dot Net version, and Zeropaid (if they want me to)...

BS Blocks *all* v0.4 connections, so that would mean you'd have to connect with Xolox to a Gnutella deamon or something similar. Just FYI, I'll continue to support 0.4.

Yes,

I think all clients will support 0.4, perhaps Limewire not...

Morgwen

0.4 connection uses 0A 0A (\n\n)

06. connection uses 0D 0A (\r\n)

there was only 0A 0A in XoloX.

ive tried different changes in the connection string, and i cant get XoloX to connect any after making the changes.

here are the connection strings used by Gnutella clients:

Connecting Version 0.4 :


GNUTELLA CONNECT/0.4\n\n

GNUTELLA OK\n\n



Connecting Version 0.6:

GNUTELLA CONNECT/0.6\r\n
User-Agent: Program Name v1.0\r\n
\r\n


GNUTELLA/0.6 200 OK\r\n
User-Agent: Program Name v1.0\r\n
\r\n


GNUTELLA/0.6 200 OK\r\n
\r\n

or better yet, how do we block 0.6 connections?

Bearshare is blocking "ALL" other clients... their hostcaches only accept "OWN" bearshare nodes!

More input!

http://www.gnutellaforums.com/showth...8237#post28237

Morgwen

Re: Re: Bearshare 2 block Xolox
 

We're no longer supporting XoloX.

dear vinnie,
f' you
enough said

if xolox sux so bad why is it alive and kicking?
why is it's undevelpoing *** doin alright raw?
why not imitate xolox instead of eliminating xolox?
unless this internet thingy becomes a proprietary network maybe we should keep it open?
bearshare has deemed xolox the ******.
write better code not exculsionary code.
innovate otherwise open your mouth n masterbate

use this and block back
http://opensourcep2p.sf.net

Re: Re: Re: Bearshare 2 block Xolox
 

This doesn't answer the question, how you stand to a client (Bearshare) that blocks other?

Have a look on the OpenP2P thread...
http://www.gnutellaforums.com/showth...&threadid=9888

U people are pathetic Xolox was hurting the network, so therefore Vinnie wanted to stop its use.

Sounds great to me.

Bearshare rocks

Re: Re: Re: Re: Bearshare 2 block Xolox
 

Well, it was a moot point at the time because development of XoloX had been suspended.

Let's see what they do with the new version of it.

XoloX has gone corporate, so it needs to be blocked too!

I think this stupid people who want to block ALL clients should be blocked!

Morgwen