WinMX World :: Forum

WinMX World Community => Winmxworld.com Strategic Directions => Topic started by: silicon_toad2000 on September 22, 2013, 11:35:34 pm

Title: New Client
Post by: silicon_toad2000 on September 22, 2013, 11:35:34 pm
All,

I am very pleased to announce that the developers have compiled a beta release of the new client - OurMX

A download location has been organised by the community.
www.ourmx.net/OurMX.zip (http://www.ourmx.net/OurMX.zip)

We are also in the process of setting up a new website to support the new client
www.ourmxworld.net (http://www.ourmxworld.net)
It is in development at the moment and content is currently being added.

A Forum has been created for bug reports.
http://www.ourmxworld.net/forums/bug-reports (http://www.ourmxworld.net/forums/bug-reports)
Please check the bug you are reporting has not already been reported.
Please include all relevant information such as operating system, outline what you were doing at the time and a screenshot if possible.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on September 23, 2013, 02:35:44 am
Congratulations on the first release I know it has been a long and difficult road to this point.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on September 23, 2013, 02:54:08 am
wow, sooner than i expected :)
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on September 23, 2013, 03:22:30 am
...and unfortunately for me it crashes after the setup wizard and doesnt run...

--edit--

figured it out... it crashes if something else is already using the port it wants to use..
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on September 23, 2013, 03:35:53 am
Just a tip for anyone who tries to run this on Windows 8 from your Program Files directory. You need to right click each DLL file and go to Properties and then click the "Unblock" box so that Windows will allow the DLL's to be loaded. You need to do this for every DLL in the folder and also the main executable. This is even if you have UAC set to its lowest setting.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on September 23, 2013, 03:57:40 am
pri; you having any luck connecting as primary? secondary works great for me but primary just keeps trying. (yes both the udp and tcp ports are forwarded..)
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: silicon_toad2000 on September 23, 2013, 04:08:57 am
make sure there's no extra instances of it running in the background
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: dapperwin on September 23, 2013, 06:17:38 pm
Congrats to all. I downloaded the new client. Can it be installed (win xp) when the old winmx 3.54 is still on the pc? Or should the old be removed? Also, can both clients be active/running at the same time? or should you 'toggle' back and forth. thanks.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Elroyd on September 23, 2013, 06:34:41 pm
Despite trying several times, no search results are showing.
I'm also having lots of problems adding files to library. Any help available ?
Thanks
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on September 23, 2013, 08:07:17 pm
Congrats to all. I downloaded the new client. Can it be installed (win xp) when the old winmx 3.54 is still on the pc? Or should the old be removed? Also, can both clients be active/running at the same time? or should you 'toggle' back and forth. thanks.


they can be installed side by side just dont put them in the same directory and dont run them at the same time
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on September 23, 2013, 08:39:42 pm
The important bit to remember is that they need to be on different ports, many folks are mentioning a crash when the cause is simply that the new client cant obtain the free port with its socket creation routine, changing the ports in setup will resolve that issue.

As with winmx if your not getting search results its likely you need to change primary node.

As many of us have uber sized libraries to share there has been a problem with the library "locking up" the client this is because as with the early versions of winmx the files are being hashed as they are scanned  and this is a tad labour intensive. The developers are working on this but for the moment can I suggest smaller batches of files be added at a time and that will keep you working till the library issue is resolved.

Thanks to all those who have posted bug reports and made screenshots to help locate these sometimes obscure issues
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Elroyd on September 23, 2013, 09:54:02 pm
Thanks for the advice GS. Working ok now.
It will take time to iron out the niggles with the new client ,but at least we have a working client.. I really appreciate the hard work that the development team undertook to bring this to fruition.
The detractors now seem to be conspicuous by their absence, you know the people i'm referring too
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on September 23, 2013, 10:04:18 pm
All in the community have been very patient with both wmw and the development team Elroyd and your correct in stating that it will take a bit more time to clear up some of the issues and  fix it up further , but I agree its a good start and my own thanks too go to all those who have helped directly or indirectly with bringing us something to build the communities future on, thanks to you all , you know who you are.  8) 8) 8)
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on September 23, 2013, 10:12:57 pm
i cant help but wonder what the release (newer versions) schedule will be?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on September 23, 2013, 11:01:15 pm
I like to think you have a good idea even if the details are a bit thin on the ground at present Stripes  :)

Stage one is this release and obviously Stage 2 is to get folks happy with using it and demonstrating its stability and useful features etc . Stage 3 is to start the work of swapping some of the network functions about and adding new ones to offer further features and critically to address some of the major protocol holes that currently we can only band aid over, at that stage the network will we hope be able to move in a single mass of users to a new client based network and enjoy some peace and quiet for some years.

As for a time frame I dare not say just yet but I'm sure once the developers have fixed most of the bugs etc the road will become clearer to all of us.

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Elroyd on September 24, 2013, 10:25:52 pm
Can anyone help please ??
When using the new client I cannot manage to download and transfer files from either the search function, or from other users lists after browsing. Is there anything I need
to configure.

Thanks
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: wonderer on September 25, 2013, 12:26:55 am
would help if you could be a bit more specific about what you do and what happens.
it does not work alone does not tell much
does the transfer get into the transfer list or not?
if so does the transfer time out ?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Elroyd on September 25, 2013, 07:45:11 am
Hi Wonderer

The files do not appear on the transfer window when I either use the download button or double click on a users file when using the search function.

Thanks for your help
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Elroyd on September 25, 2013, 04:30:00 pm
The problem i'm having has been posted in the bug reports by another user, but no response with a solution has been posted so far.

Can anyone help at all  :cry:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on September 25, 2013, 06:05:24 pm
I could spend a lot of time asking questions and then figuring out a temporary fix for the issue your having Elroyd but can I suggest you hold fire till we fix a few more bugs or just run secondary mode as thats the most bug free section of the client at this time , I owe you a favour for your patience  :)
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: harrara on September 25, 2013, 07:02:17 pm
Hmmmmm...  wonder where Joanna can be... ?    :walk:  :vomit:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: harrara on September 25, 2013, 07:17:09 pm
btw:  all others, Congratulations !!!   and thank you all who made this happend  :bow:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Elroyd on September 25, 2013, 08:04:44 pm
 GS.......Tried secondary connection which has thrown up other problems. As you suggest I will hold fire until the bugs are fixed and a more stablec lient is released
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Joanne on September 25, 2013, 08:34:14 pm
Hmmmmm...  wonder where Joanna can be... ?    :walk:  :vomit:

You should be thanking me for getting this moving.
If it was down to creeps like you it would likely be
yet another year of waiting  :yes:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on September 25, 2013, 09:54:36 pm
Nice to see you "Joanne" and while your quite wrong regarding the release time frames it is pleasing to see you are happy at last.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: wonderer on September 25, 2013, 11:00:47 pm
yeah joanne is a good whip jockey
makes me wonder when she starts complaining about updates
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Joanne on September 26, 2013, 05:05:24 pm
yeah joanne is a good whip jockey
makes me wonder when she starts complaining about updates

I knew there was something else I had to moan about  :lol:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: harrara on September 26, 2013, 05:11:22 pm
Joanna do not got any clue about me or many here  :crazy:

but good recovery to you Joanna, i dont know how bad it is  :sick:  but BAD it is

time heal  :wounded:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Joanne on September 26, 2013, 06:24:01 pm
Joanna do not got any clue about me or many here  :crazy:

but good recovery to you Joanna, i dont know how bad it is  :sick:  but BAD it is

time heal  :wounded:

Any chance of saying this in ENGLISH  :yes:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on September 26, 2013, 08:05:14 pm
"Joanne", whilst I might be good natured most of the time I need to explain our moral rules regarding the statement you have just made.

Attacking folks based on their nationality is not welcome here or appreciated, calling names still flies under the radar somewhat and you have been a bit of fun to converse with on the forum so I ask you once very nicely not to repeat such outpourings, not every poster here has english as their first language but we are all here to support the community , our community is global and thus so are its members, please bear that in mind.

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: harrara on September 27, 2013, 12:18:01 am
Joanne, you are a bit aggressive, be a little nicer in your comments
no one want to bite you, well not to hard then  :whistle:

and i saw my errors, but missing "edit" ask and I'll explain
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: WhiteLightningX on September 27, 2013, 03:56:09 pm
Woohoo! Awesome! not many people on yet though.. the only issues I've noticed so far are merely minor irritations.

Possible Bugs(or maybe just irritations):
1. After searching for a file, you cannot "refresh" the search.
2. After searching for a file, you cannot change "minimum file line," "file type," or "min bitrate.".....or search for another file using that window as stated previously.
3. After searching for a file and immediately clicking the stop button, the "# results found" at the bottom of the window flickers from 0 to 1 and back to 0 like a maniac.
4. Under the chat window, the Host, Close, and Favorites buttons are off the screen. (either have to scroll over there or expand the OurMx window to see them...also "Favorites" is "FavoUrites" in the chat window, even under USA as language)
5. After clicking secondary in the network menu, it was flashing yellow. I clicked disconnect...ALOT.... still wouldnt disconnect. Finally it did however, so i repeated the process to verify, and received the same scenario.
6. Same as before (secondary, yellow, then clicking disconnect) but after trying to disconnect, i switched it to primary, then continued to click disconnect while it was flashing yellow. Annnnndd something strange happened. It disconnected, but the top left button was refresh (not grayed out) and the top right button still said "disconnect" and was grayed out. So there was no way for me to connect to the network short of restarting the program. (tried switching back and forth from pri to sec, no luck.)

Minor Irritations:
1. "missing the old style group button for multiple audio files in the search window  :("
2. Cannot "undock" windows and move them around the screen like the old version. (I have multi-monitors, great for showing both the transfers, chat, and search window at the same time.)
3. Most pages, menus, and buttons are off center, and are instead aligned to the left side of the screen.

All in all, I must say great job to all who have helped put this project together. Perhaps by working as a community to bring back what we all loved, merely for us, regardless if anyone has told us that we can't or are not allowed to or that it's illegal, and not relied on any outside "entity," or some other corporation or person who wants the source "only for theirself," perhaps we are indeed moving into a golden age. I congratulate everyone who reads this and even those who don't read it. We have only ourselves to pat on the back, and in a strange, roundabout way, probably even owe a thanks to all the "griefers" who have caused us trouble and pushed us forward. Excellent work peoples. :thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: WhiteLightningX on September 27, 2013, 04:44:58 pm
Found some more:

Possible Bugs:

1. Double clicking to download a file in the search window doesn't work.
2. After right clicking to download a file in the search window, "1FCC D2" then "1FC2 D Spec" "1FC2 D Norm"1FC2 DS" pops up, this is probably intentional though atm.
3 Sometimes you absolutely CANNOT download a file in the search window, using any option (clicking DL button, right clicking, or by double clicking)
4. Cannot delete files through transfer window....(?)....and if deleted through by going into the folder, ourmx continues to download file. Must restart to fix this issue. On occasion, if selected file is told to cancel by clicking the cancel button, OurMx will crash.
5. Asks to "Completely Exit the program?" every time you exit, even if "Do Not ask again" is checked.
6. "Load Incomplete" does not work.
7. "Queuing" and "Options" both open the settings window. (under transfers window)


Irritations:

1. If you select a file in either the transfer window or search window(possibly others too) that file will stay selected no matter what, leaving it hard to read because it's highlighted in blue. (before you could click somewhere in the black background of the window where no file was present and it would "deselect" anything that had been selected.)
2.  :cry:"Status" in the transfers window no longer has the cool little blinky bar..... :cry:
3. Cannot highlight multiple files at the same time.
4. Everytime I switch between the transfers back to the search, it goes to the main search page instead of the most recent search.(Kind of a pain..)
5. Program does not remember column positions between restarts. (like in the transfer window and search etc..)

will post more upon observation.  :D
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: WhiteLightningX on September 27, 2013, 04:59:30 pm
UPDATE: to first post, number 6 under bugs.

This can be fixed by clicking secondary, then hitting refresh, disconnecting, then switching back to primary again. So its probably just some boolean logic type issues.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: WhiteLightningX on September 27, 2013, 05:05:04 pm
LOL sorry.....that does not fix it. The previous update does get it to say "connect," however it does nothing when you click it. Best method is to just switch it back to secondary, hit refresh or connect, then switch it to primary while it is trying to connect and just let it do the work.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: WhiteLightningX on September 27, 2013, 06:00:54 pm
Bugs:

1. Under Library, refresh does not work. (files deleted through explorer still show in library)


btw...what is the little check box beside each file for under library? because they uncheck if you click refresh...not sure if that's intentional or what..
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: harrara on September 27, 2013, 06:07:07 pm
1, 2, 3, 4, 5 !!!!!  that is spam   :nerd:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Joanne on September 27, 2013, 08:01:13 pm
Joanne, you are a bit aggressive, be a little nicer in your comments
no one want to bite you, well not to hard then  :whistle:

and i saw my errors, but missing "edit" ask and I'll explain

No problem and sorry I pulled you up on your English
that was out of order  :oops:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on September 27, 2013, 08:02:45 pm
Lightning bug finder it seems  :lol:


Whilst I'm really pleased at the amount of time and effort it takes to track down many of the bugs they need to be reported here and please check before posting a new one that it hasn't already been posted.

http://www.ourmxworld.com/forums/bug-reports

Cheers WhiteLightningX   :bow:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: WhiteLightningX on September 27, 2013, 08:05:55 pm
should i put these in a batch post? or post them individually on that site? and does my login credentials from here work there?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Joanne on September 27, 2013, 08:06:44 pm
To be honest I think this client needs so much work
to get it right and considering it has taken 2 years for this
version I cant see this new client functioning as it should
for a very long time as the coders simply do not have
the time sadly  :no:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: WhiteLightningX on September 27, 2013, 08:11:23 pm
It works fine, if you can find the file and manage to get it to download. Just has some graphical and last second hiccups. Id say the majority of it is easy peasy to fix.  :yes:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Joanne on September 27, 2013, 08:24:46 pm
It works fine, if you can find the file and manage to get it to download. Just has some graphical and last second hiccups. Id say the majority of it is easy peasy to fix.  :yes:

So how long in coding years will it take ?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: WhiteLightningX on September 27, 2013, 08:54:27 pm
Sorry GS, but since im going to have to wait for a comfirmation email, and the fact that I will be leaving soon, I need to go ahead and write these down too so that I don't forget.

To Joanne: it's done now, but to make it look pretty and stamp out all annoying and easy to spot kinks, id give it a month or 2.  :) maybe in time for christmas it'll be perfect! :33333

Bugs:

1-A. Blank file icon shows up occasionally instead of folder icon when adding folders in library, icon being a representation or (place holder maybe?) of the folder just added, and will not have any items inside. Restarting does not fix the problem.
1-B. Blank file icon shows up occasionally instead of folder icon when adding folders in library, this one contains the files that were intended to be added, which is why i listed it separately.
2. Library will occasionally add additional folders that were not selected.
3. When browsing oneself through chat room, (privacy obviously disabled) duplicate items may show
4. When browsing oneself through chat room, (privacy obviously disabled) items shown may not be up to date with filesharer's current list.
5. When browsing, "Show Full Paths" does nothing even after refreshing the list.
6. Tray icon stays even after closing. (mark this one off, someone done reported it, however I've found it happens when its closed unexpectedly, either through a crash or task manager.)
7. OurMx can be found in one or multiple instances through task manager, even though it is not visible on the desktop. (they actually may not be running, but they will be listed under task manager independently of any new ones that are opened.)
8. Yes, trying to switch between primary and secondary is hell in a handbasket if you try anything other than clicking the little dots under connection type, and you can only do that while it is blinking yellow. You've been warned.  :evil:
9. um..after about the 8 minutes 30 seconds mark of being connected as secondary, cpu usage jumps to roughly 70% and begins to become TERRIBLY slow..... Now that I've looked into it, it appears this was caused by searching for an artist. After closing out the search, cpu dropped back down to <1%.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: WhiteLightningX on September 27, 2013, 09:12:32 pm
last one lets hope...

Bugs:

1. If sharing files, when switching between any window back to the library window, where it normally displays "# results found" at the bottom of the program, the "# of files shared" briefly flashes before disappearing.
2. Sometimes if you close or crash OurMx while viewing the transfer window, when you restart the program, it will start with the transfer window maximized blocking everything all the way to the title bar, including all buttons and HUD at the bottom. (restarting a second time fixes this)
3. Hotlist bar can be shrunk to the right beyond where the words are for the "hotlist options" menu.
4. Hotlist bar's "hotlist options" menu button cannot be read unless the hotlist bar is drug far to the left because the words are centered inside the button, which apparently has a minimum size which is much to large. (button does not scale down to fit in the bar..) This could cause issues with users who have smaller resolutions.

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: WhiteLightningX on September 27, 2013, 09:33:48 pm
Nope! found some more!

Bugs:

1. Under settings>file transfers> any setting changed in this entire category has no effect, whether pressing ok, "x", or restarting. Nothing except incoming file folder will be saved. Under "Queuing," everything will be saved however.
2. Regardless of what option you click when closing the program (as i've already reported) the settings are not saved. However, even if you hit the "x" to close out the prompt and cancel closing OurMx, OurMx stil closes.
3. Adding filetypes to library through the settings menu does not work, it does not show in the search window under filetypes, even though it will indeed be listed in the settings menu after being added. (perhaps there is a specific syntax you have to type it in?)
4. When closing OurMx and selecting minimize to tray, it will always be it's native size when restored even if it was maximized prior to being sent to the tray.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on September 27, 2013, 09:37:19 pm
I'm sure most of the bugs you mention have already been reported so have a look at whats already there and add any you feel are missing and if you have extra information regarding any of the existing bugs posts then add to those, and no sorry the other site is brand new and thus all users will have to sign up again, it should make the site there more lively if only current users are posting  :yes:

@ "Joanne"
I did specify that we would release something completed or not as folks had been very patient and needed to see that we had not misled them as to our activities, we will do our best to rid the client of all of the bugs and likely do future releases with batches of fixes to avoid having too many trivial releases, thank you also for thinking further about the wording of that previous post, we dont have to be serious all of the time with each other but when theres scope for unintended offence with non domestic users then using simple plain english with less added humour often seems the best way to avoid such pitfalls. Well done  on resolving the matter 8)
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: WhiteLightningX on September 27, 2013, 09:46:06 pm
 
last one lets hope...

Bugs:

2. Sometimes if you close or crash OurMx while viewing the transfer window, when you restart the program, it will start with the transfer window maximized blocking everything all the way to the title bar, including all buttons and HUD at the bottom. (restarting a second time fixes this)


This should say Bandwidth window instead of transfers, my bad.

And excellent. I'll keep at it and begin posting them there as soon as I get an account. And will post screenshots. Yup. But unfortunately, I'm right now leaving and won't be back till Mon. So until then, they're here for now. :3 Catch you all later, and good work!
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on September 27, 2013, 10:32:20 pm
Just a thought but perhaps you can make a page similar to this on OurMX: http://www.utorrent.com/community/ideabank

So users can submit the feature requests they want implemented and also the bugs they want fixed. This would allow you to democratise the software creation process in an efficient way and focus on things the most amount of users want added or fixed. I believe there is some software already available online to implement an Idea Bank like this on any website so you wouldn't need to write it yourselves.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: silicon_toad2000 on September 27, 2013, 11:18:30 pm
Thanks for the link Pri thats awesome.
I will be implementing something like this but I'd like to focus on bugs at the moment.

Lightning, you don't need to be a member to read the bug report section nor do you need to be member to post at this stage either.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: wonderer on September 28, 2013, 05:17:12 am
No one replied to Joannes post and may be that is the best we can do, ignore
What joanne has to say is showing so little respect for the big amount of time spend on a complex project like ourmx happens to be.
I may remind joanne it took WinMx from 1999 to 2004 to develop WinMx to version 3.54 and even that version is a beta
How on earth do you expect WMW to do the same in two years? you must be very blond
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: MSmithy on September 28, 2013, 11:15:37 am
Hi, and thank you for releasing the first version of OurMX. I am sure it will evolve into something great! GhostShip, if I may suggest something to make the developers lives and our lives easier. I am seeing a lot of requests and bugs (as expected) with the first release. It would be great to include an auto-update checker which downloads new builds and patches directly to the client folder if accepted by the end user to prevent having the end user having to 'discover' new versions by looking on the website. Plus, its a faster way to push out any updates to the client. Let me know if you need help with basic overall design if this sounds like something you can put into the next release. I cannot stress enough how this feature will be convenient for users and devlopers.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: agentmulder on September 28, 2013, 12:31:20 pm
Great to see the new client.

One problem I have encountered is that using the same ports as WinMX I cannot get OurMX to connect  (using port 6699 TCP and 6257 UDP), winmx connects fine but ourmx doesn't do I need to use different ports and if so what suggests are made for the ones to use.

Many thanks
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on September 28, 2013, 04:14:40 pm
Hi Agentmulder,  welcome to WinMxWorld  :)
The situation is simply that both clients cannot use the same ports at the same time, just change the ports in either WinMX or OurMx  to something different and you should be all ok, there will be a notification soon to warn users if the port selected is already in usage, but with many of the big items to fix some of the smaller annoyances where left for later on.

@MSmithy
There is the facility of using the update bar space built into OurMx in the same fashion the WinMX developers used to alert us to updates, I am a bit worried about any type of autoupdate feature in case the release site is ever hijacked and thus it may be better to use some sort of digital signing mechanism to confirm that the update is valid and offer it in the form you have suggested as an optional download with verification at two independent locations as the chances of hitting 3 locations at the same time to deliver malware is fairly remote then I hope.

Its nice to see good friends are still abound on the network   :yes:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: achilles on October 01, 2013, 01:04:21 am
I am so... so...exited to see the first beta release of the new client!! I'm going to install it now, and see what bugs I can find. I will report back on any bugs I find. 
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: achilles on October 01, 2013, 01:10:53 am
I would like to thank  the developers very much for all the hard work, and sacrifices they have made to bring back my favorite P2P network!! I can't really express how much I appreciate what you have done in words!!
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: achilles on October 01, 2013, 05:49:57 am
I have already found several bugs, but i'm blocked from submitting bugs. I get the following message when trying to register at the new forum. "Your email address or username or IP address is blacklisted". I'm trying to use achilles for my username, and there's no reason for my email, or IP address to be blocked.

Some of the bugs I have come across so far are listed below.
1. The installer stopped responding during the install. It continued to report not responding for about 5 minutes, and then it finally completed the installation.
2. If I right click on OurMx tray icon, and choose exit OurMx will not shutdown.  OurMx continues to run no matter how many times I choose exit.  The only way I can shutdown OurMx is by killing it from the task manager, or rebooting.
3. I'm unable to run as a primary. It connects at first, but always disconnects momentarily later. Then it will no connect again. I'm able to run as a secondary without any issue.
4. When you click on the chat button the text in the message you receive warning you about the nature of the decentralized network is way off in the left margin.

I'm sure I can find more, but these are the ones I noticed within 10 minutes of using OurMx. I will report them as soon as i'm able to register at the new forum.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on October 02, 2013, 08:16:52 am
What O/S are you running Achilles also from your comment regarding the chat warning window, what is your display size set to ?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Sean on October 02, 2013, 08:55:20 pm
GhostShip and achilles,

It appears that someone is trying to manually break the lines of text in a message box. The developers simply need to pass the message string as one line and let the OS handle the wrapping. I have attached a screenshot of a message box I called using this method. I will post a similar reply on the OurMX bug report thread.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on October 02, 2013, 09:48:24 pm
Tbh Sean this text error doesnt appear in the version I have so its likely a throwback from some previous code merging, I only today had a look at the image posted by Achilles and agree its a nasty looking bunch of text  :lol:

Obviously it will be resolved in the next build  :)

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: achilles on October 04, 2013, 02:47:01 am
I'm using Windows 7 X64. My screen resolution is set as 1366x768. I have reported the bugs I mentioned here at the new forum. I will also post this info at the new forum to keep all info in one centralized location where it needs to be.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: synesthetize on October 19, 2013, 10:30:16 pm
I have an account pending for aproval so I have to post this question here:
Is ourmx.exe o any other file of the program folder synchronized for auto-updates?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on October 19, 2013, 10:46:47 pm
No , no part of the program has any autoupdate facility Synesthetize.

There will be an update notification added soonish but there's never going to be an auotmatic one in case the cartel try to criminally hijack the client update server as they did with Shareaza.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: synesthetize on November 01, 2013, 12:48:05 am
Searches work well but I couldn't download nor upload any single file yet, is it because this is just a "test" version?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: silicon_toad2000 on November 01, 2013, 02:09:36 am
there's still a number of bugs. most people have managed to upload and download. Try downloading on secondary, it should work.
there is a tutorial and a bug report page at ourmxworld.net
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: ÐØØMÊ® on November 08, 2013, 09:38:40 pm
Good job but, it says it's stuck finding a network connection when it was really connected anyway (I could connect to a chatroom), I can't seem to use the "connect/disconnect" function at all and I can't seem to use the "connection type" function :/.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: MSmithy on November 08, 2013, 10:08:41 pm
Can the new client see files that are shared by users that are on the old network? Or is the network and files contained within it and the client all separate from the old?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on November 09, 2013, 02:27:58 am
Welcome back Doomer long time no see  :-D

The client should be able to connect to the chat rooms even if its not connected to the WPN , can you check your not running winmx on the same ports at the same time (A common happening when folks are testing the beta ), also can you let us know if your using secondary or primary as if its secondary you may need to add the peer cache into your settings take a peek in there (under WPN network I think ) and ensure the peer cache addy is there if not add the following and restart the beta client  cache0.winmxworld.net press add to save that and then close the settings to complete the operation.

Remember that you may also need to allow the new beta to pass through your firewall.

Let us know how you get on  :)

@MSmithy

The beta client is fully operational on the old network and will remain so until its in better shape to handle more of the networks traffic, at that stage the developers will make some protocol variations to enhance security and remove most if not all of the current annoyances, at this time the beta needs further work to fully act as a primary to the many secondary users out there and this is obviously in the pipeline and will appear after a few more betas.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: ÐØØMÊ® on November 09, 2013, 12:43:20 pm
Thank you  :-D, glad to be back!

I've changed the ports for it which has seem to solved the apparent "stuck connecting" problem, I've checked in WPN Network and it has one called "caches.winmxworld.net" but not one called specifically "cache0.winmxworld.net". I added it, the issues I'm aware of seem to be resolved.

Yep I allowed it to pass through my Firewall.

The program is a good alternative (though it has a slightly clunkier interface), but it isn't a complete workaround for the "attacks" WinMX has received and is slightly slower when loading different tabs than the default client is.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on November 09, 2013, 09:11:11 pm
Theres a lot of work still to be done to make it as good as the original, but rest assured it can only get better  :yes:

The build strategy is to make the basic modules and then improve them or replace them if they are not up to the quality the users need.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: LiveForeverNow on November 11, 2013, 11:40:55 am
well, solid connectivity is the most important thing to work on right now. it's very flimsy at best. one day I can connect (though I can't get a single search result), the next day I can't connect at all when I have made no changes to the system. it works, I close it, then I open it again and it no longer works, can't even connect.

my ports are properly forwarded, nothing else is using the same ones at the same time, no other connection-reliant software running........new client is the only thing with issues on my pc.

weird thing is I didn't even see the option to "unblock" the dll files as instructed above. downloaded it, ran it, installed it (though there's no uninstaller or installation directory to be found).
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on November 11, 2013, 12:51:27 pm
Theres a known bug with the primary node gathering mechanism and that's being addressed, as well as many of the other bugs folks have mentioned.
As you may or may not know we have a limited amount of coder time to call on as both of the coders are working full time and thus can only give their evenings and weekends to this project so things are progressing slowly but there is certainly progress going on behind the scenes  :-D

The program should appear in whatever folder you placed it in as there has been no released installer.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: MeMeMe on December 12, 2013, 02:46:23 pm
First, let me thank everyone who has sweated over this project. As a long timer user I just hated to see the old girl go, again, and I'm gratified to see her rise from the ashes, again :-)

I'm having some issues which is to be expected from a Beta release. I'd have been stunned if I didn't. What I didn't expect however was my attempts to toddle over to the forum setup to gather bug reports to seek a little input and to record my observations and being rebuffed and hamstrung by a security setup that would make the CIA envious. By the time I get inspected, detected and I'm assuming accepted I'll have forgotten my questions and more importantly my observations. I'm sure someone has a rationalization just brimming with drama from previous slights both real and imagined for such a setup but I feel compelled to point out that our beloved network simply isn't relevant anymore and if we have hopes of being relevant again some day a full functioning client would be helpful and for that to happen collection of data would be helpful.

Also wouldn't hurt at all to not give the impression of being some insular community that ain't friendly; I know better but a Virgin would have given up in disgust 2 minutes in to what I just went through and Virgins will ultimately make or break this latest rebirth.

Really hope this works out, would love to help anyway I'm able. Hopefully next time I try we'll get results that benefit everyone.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Joanne on December 12, 2013, 05:37:48 pm
You couldnt make it up, this whole saga has gone on too long and has been handled badly  too :(
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: wonderer on December 12, 2013, 06:55:15 pm
Finally we are out of trouble

Joanne is going to show us how thing should be handled in a proper way making thing go much faster and easier
Why did we not ask Joanne before how we should have done it?
Possibly because we would not even have a beta to complain about

I agree with MeMeMe that an easier accessible site to report bugs and request features would possibly bring more input.
As a matter of fact I have registered on that site but forgot where to look for it :P
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Joanne on December 12, 2013, 07:15:29 pm
Finally we are out of trouble

Joanne is going to show us how thing should be handled in a proper way making thing go much faster and easier
Why did we not ask Joanne before how we should have done it?
Possibly because we would not even have a beta to complain about

I agree with MeMeMe that an easier accessible site to report bugs and request features would possibly bring more input.
As a matter of fact I have registered on that site but forgot where to look for it :P

Well I couldnt do any worse thats for sure  :no:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on December 12, 2013, 09:10:23 pm
HI MeMeMe, I thank you for your feedback with attempting to proffer feedback to the OurMx developers on the ourmx forum, I too fell into the same security trap when I first went over there so I know of the frustration you mention.

I will pass along your request to make life a tad simpler for helpful folks like yourself to join in the development  fun and I can confirm some of the bugs that are in the beta 1 have been resolved at this stage but some still remain in the current  beta 2 which is not yet ready for release but is firming up nicely in many areas, we will get there and I hope bring the old confident flavour back to the current users of this network, most WPN users are self reliant and self motivated ,but many are tired and annoyed with the childish attacks, the basic advice I try to deliver is one of unity and focus of effort  as that's the network I remember  back in the day and I hope to see rise again, cheers for taking the time to let us know some things are going wrong , these matters will be attended to  :)


@"Joanne"

I find that less than funny considering I have asked the entire community at nearly every stage to assist on many projects and very few offers of assistance have been forthcoming, some at least offered to assist with things that we all need but those few are in the handful whilst the community is a lot bigger than that, and personally  "Joanne"  I believe we could do a lot  better in terms of leadership in matters,  your still not even willing to own up to your real identity here, theres no need to pretend to be some random user when I know full well who you are from both your IP and your style of typing, if you want respect you have to be honest with folks , they may not always appreciate candour but they always appreciate the truth.

Just to put your mind at rest , you wont be banned for using your original name.



Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Joanne on December 13, 2013, 02:53:22 pm
Ghost would you like my name and address too?

I am fully aware that you know my IP and you know which
chat rooms I visit. I can also change my IP but choose
not to so I am not hiding anything quite the opposite.

I feel that some of the users on here just suck up and
dont really say what they think.

As for helping to speed up this painfully slow project
tell me how I can help and if I can I most certainly will.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Bluey_412 on December 13, 2013, 05:50:10 pm
Hasn't somebody taken that whining windbag and put it in a bag and dropped it over the side yet?

About 1,000 miles out to sea would be good
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on December 13, 2013, 06:06:49 pm
To be honest "Joanne" I have to admit I really dont know which rooms you visit and to be honest both that and your name and address are strictly none of my business.

I will take up your offer of help as tbh I need some extra hands, have you seen anything you might enjoy doing or would you be happy to simply work on whatever is the most pressing priority ?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Joanne on December 13, 2013, 07:34:23 pm
To be honest "Joanne" I have to admit I really dont know which rooms you visit and to be honest both that and your name and address are strictly none of my business.

I will take up your offer of help as tbh I need some extra hands, have you seen anything you might enjoy doing or would you be happy to simply work on whatever is the most pressing priority ?

How can I help then Ghost?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on December 13, 2013, 11:30:38 pm
I shall PM you with a list of things we need assistance with and you can selet one that you you feel is both helpful to the community and your happy to do.

I havent made a public list of many of the jobs we need as we do try to match up the tasks with the skills of the volutneers so that no task is too arduous, "Joanne" is it seems happy to put money where mouth is and proffer some assistance, something we can all respect "Joanne" for.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on December 14, 2013, 01:59:41 pm
Just so the rest of you are kept in the loop "Joanne" has sent me a reply and I hope will be doing some valuable work for all of us in this community , this is of course the best thing to come out of this, we all win when we work together and with more hands we can hope to deliver faster progress  :)

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: silicon_toad2000 on December 16, 2013, 02:10:12 am
MeMeMe I see you managed to get past the security on the ourmxworld forum.
It's really not all that fancy, all plain simple off the shelf stuff deployed throughout the site.
As far as real or imagined slights, it has nothing to do with whatever drama you're referring to, It's simply in response to the logs of what hits the site daily.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: synesthetize on February 18, 2014, 02:30:32 am
What happened to ourmxworld.com? Is the project still ongoing?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: silicon_toad2000 on February 18, 2014, 03:49:25 am
yes, the site is just down as I screwed something up
should be back up in the next few days
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: wonderer on February 18, 2014, 07:22:44 pm
lol toad if it works don't fix it
number one rule on trouble shooting :P
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: J a M e S on March 09, 2014, 12:39:35 am
wow. Congrats,
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: J a M e S on March 09, 2014, 12:47:58 am
If you require a mirror for the the client to help with distribution i run a hosting business and id be happy to give an account for free to help with server costs. open a ticket @ www.lovehosts.com and il b able to sort it out for ya

Anyone remember me? Its James.. been on this site about 8 years now. Sorry been away a while.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: J a M e S on March 09, 2014, 01:26:35 am
Observation : On new client, even though my ports are not open, and the client figures this out (by me telling it, there not open and nothing i can do about it..) the client still wants me to connect via primary by default. Perhaps in this case it could automatically select "secondary" as id imagine a new user for first time might just say bugger it and delete it if they cant connect. Or am i missing something, my internet is absolute crap right now so might just be me. otherwise seems okay,
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on March 09, 2014, 10:14:51 am
I'll get that added James, theres been so many bigger items to fix up that some of the smaller things are not as they should be, cheers for the feedback  8)
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: J a M e S on March 09, 2014, 03:13:06 pm
first thing i noticed :) everything else is okay. It does feel much like the old client, in terms of simplicity and looking dated, but that maybe that ive been away so long im not used to it. Id imagin with the isps blocking big torrent sites we have a market for increased traffic
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on March 12, 2014, 11:39:02 pm
Tbh I dont think the WPN is ever going to be the top place to obtain and share movies as the existing limitations of the WinMX client make it near impossible to handle the large file sizes and thats actually been one of the reasons we havent had even more attackers trying to smash the network, the WPN is small beer to the hollywood copyright mafia and we have tried to do our bit by asking folks to share their own material and not the crap Hollywood churns out (something like at least 5 new movies a day globally but most of them are B-rated and no one wants to watch them unless they are getting them for free), I like to think that by creating and sharing our own materials we dont have to look over our shoulders and neither do we look to deliver revenues to the cartels, I also like to think that they dont spend a fortune paying "interdiction" companies to steal network bandwidth and waste WinMX users resources and time because they know also that this isnt the network for large movie files.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Plum on March 13, 2014, 05:15:55 pm
Even when we do share original, open source, or copyleft content, we could still be sued. The cartels are that ugly. There have been people writing their own songs (lyrics and music) on YouTube and still getting take-down notifications. Yes, they challenge them and stuff, but there are still all the headaches. WMG is bad about doing that to people. It seems they want to attack on the basis of losing their bottom line. If you steal their crap or make your own, they don't get money. It is much like a labor union thug mentality to go after independent producers. There was a bar in Europe that was being sued for playing music without paying annual fees to the music rights union or whatever. The thing was, none of the music the bar played was from their members. They were playing creative commons music (under the CC licenses that allow for commercial use). Luckily, the judge ruled in their favor.

There are even now federal laws against using file-sharing software to share copyright content on college campuses. State funded universities could lose federal money if they don't implement filtering, and if they don't report such activity to the police. Someone had an interesting activism idea. Why not put a lot of huge tarballs and other open source archives on there? Things like Linux, Open Office, etc. Then when someone gets busted for distributing free content, they can sue whoever.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on March 13, 2014, 08:56:38 pm
As a decentralised network thankfully no one can control what goes on, some ignorant of how the WPN works have tried to claim otherwise but on further inspection its just not possible with the current network design to do anything but firewall selected users individually or with the blocklist and that's only with the support of the community.

I was asked to advise in one particular instance regarding the law and the collection of UK public performance royalties and the person asking my advice went the extra dollar in ensuring the music they wished to play was not from sources signed to any label or association linked in any way with the collection society, such music does exist and when confronted with the facts nothing more was heard from the "taxing" entity.

We all know that in general the copyright tax Cartels and those politicians they bribe "donate" to are simply interested in putting all of their legal bills onto the public plate so we end up paying to do something they themselves are too selfish to do, who here would buy a car without looking at it or purchase a home entertainment item simply by looking at the brown box it was packed in ?

Purchasing music is no different to buying something blind if you follow their old style monopolist thought train, I hate to have to spill the beans to the recording industry but if we don't hear anything we feel is worth parting with our money for, the chances are you wont be seeing our business, I myself have a large collection of CD's and enjoy owning the material I like and most folks who use P2P networks are the same in fact study after study says we are your best customers, I would like to think if I repeat this factual message long enough they might get clued in but its been 10 years of telling it for me, how dumb are these record company chumps?   
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Plum on March 19, 2014, 07:15:35 pm
So how is the client going, and where is ourmxworld.com?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on March 19, 2014, 08:08:23 pm
OurmxWorld is being worked on as its a one man job and hes been busy with work and real life commitments atm Plum, as for the client its still alive and well and growing each day, we are a bit in the same boat with that in that the main developer is not about atm for the same sort of reasons and he makes the new release, I think I have posted this info already but its a fair question and I am trying to get time made to get a further release out to the folks we have fixed many of the bugs and added further features so there is something in hand but its in need of the main mans fine handywork to smooth its feathers and set it loose to the public, our main programmer also ensures it works with linux and wine and other operating systems aside from xp so we have to be patient even if it means frustration
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: LostCanvas on March 22, 2014, 09:09:20 am
Hello everyone!
Can you post an alternative mirror for ourmx?
In first post, OurMX.zip doesn't work :(

Thanks!
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: silicon_toad2000 on March 22, 2014, 10:59:37 am
working on it when time permits
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on March 22, 2014, 01:04:57 pm
We are hoping to be able to get a beta 2 out within the next month so it might be worth waiting till then to get a copy of OurMX LostCanvas, beta 1 featured the usual beta selection of bugs and missing features and we have been working to eliminate many of thse for the next release as you would expect  :)
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: LostCanvas on March 22, 2014, 02:27:27 pm
thanks a lot :)
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: MinersLantern on April 03, 2014, 07:28:26 am
Isnt it time for a new release?

My biggest thing is how ourmx refuses to find its own connections.

It searches well, it blocks the fakes. Let it run wild and it should simply either find more connections on its own or reload from the caches.

Or is that is what is preventing a new release?

Forget the nice appearance crap. I would run it 24/7/365 just to rape, KM or whoever, and knock all other polluted clients offline myself.

What is the holdup?

It shouldnt be terribly complex to make the thing notice that it has run out of addresses and should access the servers to get more at least.

I think you all are attempting to be too perfect.

If that one little bug has been corrected, time for a new release.

There is no problem with multiple releases and corrections.

How well has that worked for microsoft and firefox?

VERY well.

Ghost was complaining how users are going away. Well, no wonder.

Ive been away from running winmx at all for a few months, doing my trucks transmission, running around back and forth to the doctors for my client, rebuilding my new computer.

I fired it up again 2 days ago, and its worse than it ever has been.

Seriously. The part that blocks the flooders and shows the real files has already been done on the first release.

Can this thing be made functional enough to at least spread itself all over the WPN and flood the flooders?

I would imagine that if their successful attempts were to become less successful, they would find it most annoying.

Time for a new release. IF it has gotten that far along, with the ability to at least access the caches to keep itself online forever as a primary. The biggest thing is cutting off the flooders, with a nice stable neverending connection, KM or whatever is doing the destruction.

I would have no problem with running ourmx myself as a simple primary. Without the expectation of trades. As long as it runs along increasing the strength of the WPN.

So, time to release a version that does that.

All other improvements can wait till later.

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on April 03, 2014, 08:25:33 am
We are aiming for a release this very month Miners Lantern, due to the nature of the work we have to rely on the voluntary time of some rather talented folks and with the economy here in the UK where both guys live being a bit of a damp squib its been hard work keeping their heads above water financially, both developers are spending more time working than ever before, however they too feel its time for another release and are incorporating all of the code updates created since the last versions into the release so we should see a more successful and pleasing issue,

On the negative side, there are some parasites who have been going around the chat rooms disparaging the initial work already put together simply out of malice and those kind of folks are the ones the developers have to address also as whilst your happy to run whatever is delivered they cant really be expected to put something out that's going to allow these time wasting chumps an easy stick to beat WMW  and themselves with, and thus some significant level of functionality has to be achieved with each release that's substantially an improvement over the previous build, the developers think they have achieved that at this time and are preparing for a release, it may take some days or some weeks but they are expecting to deliver another beta as soon as they have cleaned it up and stabilised some of the new additions as is normal practice.

I have been complaining about general apathy in the userbase but we both know theres a core group of folks who wont be bullied and dictated to by selfish attackers who seek to destroy the community, this war has been raging for some time now and as you correctly point out is the result of one guys stupidity or malice, I cant be sure which it was but one guys treachery has lead to a significant assault on the community over the last few years, my point for moaning was that time is being lost by myself posting news and doing work that others could spare a few minutes to do and its disheartening to see few care about this place enough to help with those roles just when we need the extra support.

On the better news side of things, the developers believe they have addressed the IP gathering issue successfully and many other petty annoyances, like yourself I look forward to the next release and more such releases over time until we have all our eggs back in the community basket.

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: wonderer on April 03, 2014, 09:30:55 am
looking at the bright side of it all I see a community that still exists eight years after official close down in spite of all efforts of certain individuals to destroy it.
If that is not an achievement I really don't know what else is.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on April 03, 2014, 09:52:11 pm
Very well said Wonderer,  I'm always proud to be a part of this community as are many others and its often forgotten that the support  community has been maintaining the network for longer than frontcode did, as you say a fine achievement  and one we should always be thankful for  :yes:

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Eddy Belly on April 05, 2014, 06:47:09 am
Well 1st of all... well down everyone for bringing the community back online

please help me join in

Either i'm being really thick but i can't get the download link to work
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: silicon_toad2000 on April 05, 2014, 09:16:38 am
links down, i havent had a chance to fix it up
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on April 05, 2014, 09:25:08 am
The Ourmxworld.com forum is being worked on at this time Eddy Belly, its scheduled to reappear when we have the beta 2 client ready so folks can deliver their feedback and notes to the developers, due to the amount of bugs in beta 1 its probably best you hold fire till beta 2 arrives, Its scheduled for release in some weeks and we hope will fix many of the annoyances folks have been teling us about   :D
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Zigmaz on April 07, 2014, 10:24:58 am
yeay
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: rhd2330 on April 25, 2014, 07:04:14 pm
Do you have a release date yet?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on April 25, 2014, 07:44:13 pm
It seems setting release dates is like shooting yourself in the foot  :oops:

The beta 2 is still being worked on to deliver all the magic we can and on top of that beta 3 is being started, this will feature an open nap engine so folks can join open nap if the WPN sky falls in, this will of course follow the beta 2 release as thats a key one but after that the developers hope to be able to have more frequent releases and finally get things back to normal for you all.

If folks have some time to help me with collating data for the open nap side of things that would be most welcome, as always thank you all for your patience and rest assured theres work going on every day towards getting an initial proper release thats not a beta.

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: wonderer on April 25, 2014, 08:11:01 pm
did I ever tell you to wear safety shoes ?
There seem to be bulletproof kevlar types for those that keep shooting in their foot
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: FULLER on April 27, 2014, 03:31:36 pm
My post which highlights the lies and failings on here was deleted.

You dont want the truth do you?

Embarrassing  :yes:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on April 27, 2014, 06:05:39 pm
I'm not aware of any post that was deleted, mind sharing your thoughts with us ?

Please try to stick to the topic however as folks get bored (as I do) with paranoid rants that have little basis in reality.

/me awaits interesting post
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: FULLER on April 27, 2014, 06:27:00 pm
I'm not aware of any post that was deleted, mind sharing your thoughts with us ?

Please try to stick to the topic however as folks get bored (as I do) with paranoid rants that have little basis in reality.

/me awaits interesting post

There is no paronoia, I actually checked back and read my own post.

You lot are embarrassing with your false promises and lies.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on April 27, 2014, 07:13:32 pm
Sorry I must not have made myself clear :

What is it you wish to tell us ?  I was hoping for something more cerebral with perhaps some diatribe regarding the slipped release dates , you know something I might be able to discuss in a mature and adult way, I still have no knowledge of your alleged post nor it seems does anyone else here, are you even sure you pressed the "post"  button ?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: silicon_toad2000 on April 27, 2014, 09:27:45 pm
I deleted the post. It was obnoxious and threatening and had no place here.

If you want to make a point about your disappointment that's fine, but I won't have posts here threatening to continue spamming if your account gets banned.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on April 27, 2014, 09:53:34 pm
I suppose its nice that the poster cares so much about the new client but when placed against the silence each time I ask folks for a little help perhaps he only has himself to blame, however.. Fuller my apologies for thinking you had made a mistake in your claims but as Silicon says if your post was so bad hes deleted it then I can only ask you to get annoyed at home, pace around your room a  bit and then make a post when your in less of a bad mood as honestly we all want to see something new and improved but its not worth losing friends over.

Just so you know what I,m working on today and that I,m not slacking off its the open nap documentation that seems not to exist in a decent format anywhere, I hope you will appreciate that it wont write itself and enjoy it next week when I post it here with some diagrams for developers and myself to work from.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on April 28, 2014, 01:54:34 am
Quote
ts the open nap documentation that seems not to exist in a decent format anywhere

i thought slavanap came with a text file with the entire protocol documented?

heres a link i found with a quick google search http://opennap.sourceforge.net/napster.txt
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on April 28, 2014, 08:22:42 am
Cheers Stripes but that's pretty useless for me, theres more than one copy about and they are not the same I had to dig around a bit to find the later version that has packet types in that are not in the one you posted, also the simple stuff like logging in is not explained anywhere i had to do some packet captures to confirm how that went, in short I will post up my own documentation with all of the packets and a few maps of whats going on as working from Dr scholls docs leaves a lot of things unclear and most developers need fast and comprehensive information all laid out for them, give me a few days and I think you'll agree what I have put together will blow that old page away in terms of usefulness
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: FULLER on April 28, 2014, 05:40:29 pm
I deleted the post. It was obnoxious and threatening and had no place here.

If you want to make a point about your disappointment that's fine, but I won't have posts here threatening to continue spamming if your account gets banned.

Well you proved my point, the post may have been obnoxious
but it certainly was not threatening.

Thanks for admitting that you dont like the truth  :yes:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on April 28, 2014, 06:44:03 pm
No point has been proved Fuller, it might not be obvious to you but I for one am not psychic and haven't read your post along with many others so how is it then possible to claim your point is proved ?

I need to make a real point here however, you have signed up here recently and have so far brought nothing to the table and in fact wasted my time when I'm one of those trying to bring the new client to you at some time in the future, do you not have the common sense to see that your attitude and your actions are  part of the reason why the client is late ?

I spoke with Silicon regarding your lost post and what became clear was that you had nothing to say about the community , nothing to say about the new client being a good bad or ugly idea, not even a complaint about what features are or are not in it .. No, you simply made your post threatening to spam this forum like a parasite if wmw didn't let you stamp your childish foot in public, so having now made your point or not it seems how about going away and coming back when you have reached the age of maturity, I have all the time in the world for real winmxers who might feel let down and a bit upset that things might be delayed but they have been through the mill along with us and suffered the last few years, you have no excuse and no reason to be rude, have a nice day but please stop wasting my time and being abusive, you have earned no rights to do so here.

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: FULLER on April 28, 2014, 07:52:04 pm
So now I am to blame for the client being late.

You lot on here really are pathetic.

Now get off your lazy ass and deliver what you have promised for 3 YEARS  :lol:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: silicon_toad2000 on April 28, 2014, 09:26:32 pm
don't worry fuller, we're docking their pay for every day it's late
I'm sure there are penalty clauses in their contracts

oh wait, that's right, they're not getting paid, there's no agreement, or contract.
I wonder why they're doing this? what do you think fuller?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on April 28, 2014, 09:29:41 pm
Yes you are to blame as its clear you are simply one of a number of time wasting trolls encountered during the development and have nothing to do besides waste the time of the volunteers here, the funny thing is in all this is that I can continue my work regardless of what you want.and thats what I intend to do , it is however a shame that folks like yourself make it harder for the real network users to speak to the development group, I am the only one who reads this forum on their behalf so whilst you may have wasted my time they wont have read a word you posted.

I shall ignore any further posts from you Fuller, others are still free to ask client related questions and will of course receive my full attention.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: FULLER on April 29, 2014, 08:04:52 pm
Yes you are to blame as its clear you are simply one of a number of time wasting trolls encountered during the development and have nothing to do besides waste the time of the volunteers here, the funny thing is in all this is that I can continue my work regardless of what you want.and thats what I intend to do , it is however a shame that folks like yourself make it harder for the real network users to speak to the development group, I am the only one who reads this forum on their behalf so whilst you may have wasted my time they wont have read a word you posted.

I shall ignore any further posts from you Fuller, others are still free to ask client related questions and will of course receive my full attention.

You are deluded, development group my arse  :lol:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on April 29, 2014, 10:50:11 pm
please quit arguing... it doesnt do any good... trust me i know from first hand experience
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: nismo528 on May 05, 2014, 12:00:37 am
can we get the beta put back up for download, or at least post it somewhere else so it is available?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: silicon_toad2000 on May 05, 2014, 03:04:26 am
I'll get it up on the ourmxworld site. We were hoping to get a new release out, but I understand one of the key devs has had a lot of work on and hasn't been able to tie it in.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: jazst on May 09, 2014, 08:44:27 pm
I'm not a programmer so I don't know much about running projects like OurMX.
I do wonder why isn't the code open sourced so more people can work on it. Would it make the work  of core developers more difficult? Do you think developers of WinMX would try to sabotage it?
In my observation people in chat rooms seem to be a bit dismissive of OurMX due to it being closed source and probably even more because there's no visible progress.

I understand the lack of time developers have and I applaud their work.
I however do have some criticism about supporting activities. After beta was released the only site/forum distributing OurMX went offline ... excuse me, but keeping single forum online is a trivial task. After site came back (on different domain) it lacks download of OurMX beta. Links to the download here are still showing previous address ... communication about OurMX was forced mostly to the other forum which as I mentioned went offline.
I understand a wish to have centralized communication, but due to community being here, wouldn't it be simpler to have forum for discussions here and distribute it simply by putting software on one of distribution sites like wetransfer? I admit I don't know about history of WinMX so there might be historical reasons preventing it.
Also I advise editing 1st post here repeatedly to cover all the news.

I hope I didn't hurt anyones feelings with my criticism, I appreciate everyones efforts in this and I think pointing out what could be done better might help smooth the following releases.

Also I've read that help is wanted and there is a task list, but I fail to find it. I'd really appreciate if someone can point me to the correct thread so I can see if i can be of any assistance.

P.S. this silly 5 step verification before one can post is really beyond annoying.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: silicon_toad2000 on May 09, 2014, 11:09:46 pm
A lot of your questions have been answered through the thread, but it's a heck of a long read full of a lot of people trying to get it off track and troll so I'll do my best to help out.

The code isn't open source as the winmx protocol is full of security holes, hence the issues the network has now. The new client is initially backwards compatible and so some of those security holes will be carried over in the first stage. Open sourcing the project will make it much easier for any attackers to figure out any vulnerabilities.

Supporting activities are down to me and my own lack of ability and time. The smart people are working on the client. I'll correct a little as you have the story screwed up. The client was distributed on the ourmx.net domain. There was no forum there or anything at all, just the file. The forum has always been at ourmxworld.net which went down when i broke it trying to reconfigure the server and took me some time to sort it out again.

This forum is for the support of winmx, ourmxworld was created to support ourmx.

Well you haven't hurt my feelings and i doubt you've hurt anyone else's feelings. I'm the first to admin as far as servers and hosting goes I haven't a clue what I'm doing, but I choose to muddle ahead anyway with the help of people in the community. The advice and help of people in the community really goes to show that anything is possible. Before building ourxmworld, I hadn't a clue about any of it. The willingness of people in the community to take time and explain things and help people learn is a real testament to what I have come to love about them and most of the reason I have stuck it out here despite the trolls, attacks and just plain rude people we come across.

The list of things to help out the community was posted here http://forum.winmxworld.com/index.php/topic,12873.msg72852.html#msg72852 (http://forum.winmxworld.com/index.php/topic,12873.msg72852.html#msg72852) .

The verification is just something that has to be done, the volume of bots trying to post about this seasons snow blowers or the latest whatever is mind blowing. I can't imagine how much bandwidth could be free'd up globally and how much energy could be saved if these spambots and spam emailers ceased.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on May 10, 2014, 02:13:03 am
Quote
the winmx protocol is full of security holes
isnt winmx a 2nd generation p2p app? napster being 1st generation..
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: silicon_toad2000 on May 10, 2014, 02:38:08 am
i understand the first versions of winmx were nap clients only, wasn't the wpn only begun in version2 something or other?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on May 10, 2014, 11:26:40 am
I would like to add a small note here in response to Jazst's post :

The OurMx project will be open-sourced when it no longer uses the current primary protocol implementation, there are specific areas that will require either modifying or replacing and it would be irresponsible to release it as -is as open src with tens of  thousands of existing hard coded WinMx clients open to potential abuse given the information contained in the OurMx src, we do have rolling plans to make the important changes and some areas have already been closed to attacks but further work is necessary.

The main area of concern is within the primary TCP networking, when we are happy that each client will defend both itself and its neighbours from passing bad traffic we will be happy to release all of the code on a suitable release platform, I like src forge myself but others have other ideas.

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: jazst on May 10, 2014, 05:30:41 pm
Thank you silicon_toad2000 and GhostShip for your extensive answers.

My apologies for missing the already provided answers in this thread.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: FULLER on May 10, 2014, 05:45:36 pm
All we need to know now is which millenium the new client will be finished  :lol:

ONLY JOKING
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Plum on May 12, 2014, 04:21:37 pm
All we need to know now is which millenium the new client will be finished  :lol:

ONLY JOKING

That sounds more like the ReactOS project. It is maybe 14 years old and still not beta.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: FULLER on May 13, 2014, 08:57:08 am
All we need to know now is which millenium the new client will be finished  :lol:

ONLY JOKING

That sounds more like the ReactOS project. It is maybe 14 years old and still not beta.

I wouldnt be suprised if this client never happens.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on May 13, 2014, 10:04:29 am
You mean if the update never happens ?

The client base has already appeared as beta 1 and can be found following the links off the front of the forum.

For beta 2 we had a rather extensive list of bugs to cover and some of those required an expert level coder, thankfully we have such a chap however like most valuable things he is in massive demand from his real life job, whilst he is fixing that version I have been ploughing ahead with the open nap side of things for beta 3, by beta 4 we hope to be able to make serious changes to the primary networking operation and then be back to normal, no doubt we will have to engage in a running battle with some low life attackers but we are no longer locked in stone so if such an attacker turns up they will have to work pretty fast to keep up with the potentially limitless amount of client updates, thats the path we are following and I can boast we have never not delivered, slow perhaps but what I have said will turn up always has done.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on May 14, 2014, 01:57:41 am
Those of you posting negatively really need to stop. These unpaid volunteers do not owe you a single thing and the level of self entitlement being shown here is ridiculous.

Some of you really need to start showing some empathy towards others, just because we appear here as blocks of text does not mean there isn't a person on the other side of the screen reading what you're saying and being affected by it.

Encourage those who seek to better our position, don't mock them or their attempts.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: MinersLantern on May 14, 2014, 06:10:50 am
Who is this Fuller person?
A 13 year old? It sure looks like it!

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: silicon_toad2000 on May 14, 2014, 07:01:07 am
Fuller/Ants/Joanne is just a troll and will keep coming back each time we talk about it, honestly not worth the effort.
If it gets too bad we can ban them but not worth the effort, ignore them and they'll go away.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: FULLER on May 15, 2014, 08:31:52 pm
You sychophants can all suck as much as you like but winmx
is dead.

Chat rooms are shutting almost daily and as much as you have
tried, it has taken way too long and users have moved on.

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: FULLER on May 15, 2014, 08:33:52 pm
I should also add, just look back at the false promises on here
the go back YEARS  :(
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on May 15, 2014, 10:41:48 pm
Perhaps you would be happy to show them to me
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: silicon_toad2000 on May 15, 2014, 11:15:02 pm
Fuller has been banned

for those who care what fuller has to say, just scroll back, it's all the same.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on May 15, 2014, 11:34:24 pm
I wont be complaining that the naysayer is no longer welcome, you makes your bed and you get to lie in it..
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: MSmithy on May 18, 2014, 11:38:33 am
Maybe I missed it somewhere but, is there an ETA on the next build of the new client to fix the bugs?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: wonderer on May 18, 2014, 11:47:11 am
ETA somewhere in future
the more patient you are the sooner it will be
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: silicon_toad2000 on May 18, 2014, 01:32:38 pm
No, no ETA at this stage
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: MACROFAN on May 18, 2014, 05:19:41 pm
Maybe I missed it somewhere but, is there an ETA on the next build of the new client to fix the bugs?

Just ask which millenium, this lot are a bunch of jokers
just scroll back through 3 YEARS and see the false promises.

Winmx is finished and this new client is YEARS away from even beta.

The answer here is ban anyone that challenges the JOKERS.

THIS LOT ARE A BUNCH OF JOKERS WHO KID THEMSELVES.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Bluehaze on May 18, 2014, 05:39:43 pm
Macrofan, why do you fear this project? There is no harm in it to you. Why do you keep hanging around "jokers" (your words) and contending with them? Are you a "joker" joker?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on May 18, 2014, 09:30:56 pm
This is the same troll who needed me to remind them that beta 1 was on the front page of the site, hardly a broken promise.

As we all know naughty children are apt to be impatient, squeal a lot and stamp their little feet when their toys are not about to be smashed into a wall or hit with a hammer, I'm really sorry your folks didnt spend more time with you.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: wonderer on May 20, 2014, 10:07:15 am
There can't be no ETA as that would say there will NOT be a new release and there will be one for sure
The confusion here lays in the ETA which is now used as Expected Time of Arrival but origins as Estimated Time of Arrival which is a huge difference.
I will persist in
ETA somewhere in future
the more patient you are the sooner it will be.
The more eager you are the longer it seems to take
Be patient and suddenly it will be there, sooner then expected :D

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on May 20, 2014, 10:48:05 am
http://www.acronymfinder.com/ETA.html 

there are many meanings for ETA.... see for yourself....


a curious question for the devs... and i know this one will be waaaaay later down the road... but is a native 64bit version on the drawing board?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on May 20, 2014, 11:10:32 am
I don't see any issue with having a 64 bit in the future as whilst there are some variables that need tweaking to ensure they wont deliver the wrong value most of the modern development suites offer such functionality as standard and our main developer always has the most up to date VS installed, I don't however and cant turn out the quality releases he does, but to answer your question it is not actually on the drawing board at this time, reaching a stable and complete build is the main goal in all respects.

Please all be aware to the fact we are at the moment a 2 man team and both in full time work, we will deliver when we can but I share your disappointment in the major amount of time it takes to get you new versions of ourmx, its not through lack of effort but to make the best for you folks takes a bit of time and a lot of skill, both are always in short supply, if you know of someone who is a guru in MFC c++ then feel free to point them in this direction as more hands makes a completion that much faster.

As Wonderer states we will deliver regardless of time span and the work will never stop until the ourmx client is able to stand on its own against the network attackers and have no major bugs, I think that's all there is to say at this time, I am still compiling the opennap data for the development folks and hope to reach an initial release of that soon to supplement the other data we hold to support client building.

This obviously robs time from the code work but is necessary for our future and perhaps that of the opennap community also who are locked into using clients even older than winmx , they too might like our materials to assist with development and so its worthwhile for them and us.

My thanks to all of those who keep the faith, we will get there and I hope with a contented heart.

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: untaimed18 on August 12, 2014, 02:19:28 pm
So any progress report on beta 2?  :)
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on August 12, 2014, 06:07:18 pm
Hi Untaimed18  :)

Not too much to report thats new,  we have reworked a lot of the library and added missing code to many areas and we are working still on some primary issues that are not being helped by the cowardly attackers, its not easy to test stuff on the network when its full of junk traffic broadcast by someone with more time than brainpower , you know who you are  :tongue:

I'm working on recruiting a few more hands to ensure we can reach the commemorative date, its not guaranteed yet but theres still some time in the bag to tie up some of the loose ends and add further features missing in the last release, so nothing exciting to mention at this time but we have as I may have mentioned started an opennap equipped version that will arrive around the beta 3 mark, the next release aims to fix up bugs and issues in the first release and then we can move ahead on solid ground again, as you would expect further research into additional anti p2p tricks has been undertaken and we hope also to add those to the client in the future, the route is still clone then add new features and modify the protocol to eliminate attacks from criminals, once we have all that in hand I think the work can be called complete. 


Title: Re: New Client
Post by: wonderer on August 12, 2014, 11:40:50 pm
It must be easy to create a very small restricted network
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on August 13, 2014, 04:59:38 am
It must be easy to create a very small restricted network


i thought of this too but apparently the devs are going with a 'build it on the battleground' approach... how better than to test armor but in live fire?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: silicon_toad2000 on August 13, 2014, 07:25:32 am
They do make a small isolated network now and then, but for a bit of spur of the moment testing when everyone else it AFK it can be difficult to arrange.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: wonderer on August 14, 2014, 02:59:01 am
Bad habit of networks, you always need more then one to have a network
may be you should say at least three
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: RebelMX on August 14, 2014, 06:38:17 pm
Actually you only need 1 pc.
Need a peercache, and 3 VM's running winmx on different ports.  Small networks are possible without too much work.

Nevertheless, I'm yet to have any progressive contact from the 2 dev's working on the project, namely Will and GS.  Offers been there now for a month as of tomorrow including explanations of what I can offer.  I understand that Will's a busy guy, but if you really wanted the extra help that desperately you'd be doing everything to speak to him.  I'm man enough for you to decline my offer, but please GS don't tell people publicly that you're "working on recruiting a few more hands" when some have offered for some time now.  Unfortunately I'm now back at college studying, and changing jobs at the same time, however if you honestly want the help I will make the time to give you it, but let's not pretend I'm party to anything yet it just gets peoples hopes up that there are new dev's involved.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on August 14, 2014, 07:10:40 pm
I am giving the people the impression of seeking specialist help as I am in fact doing so, I hope to be able to announce a new dev joining the dev group in the next few days, I am only looking to increase the number to make up for the lack of time available to Will.

I have my eye on a programmer who has a lot of experience using the specific programming language we are using, I haven't forgotten your offer, i do hope you appreciate however that I myself have been focused on trying my best to move the project along to ensure it does not stall, little time has been spent on other issues that would normally cause me concern.

When I speak to Will I will of course contact you directly.

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on September 11, 2014, 12:21:58 am
I think its about time I made some sort of announcement on the subject of the next OurMx beta, currently I am awaiting at least one key element from one of the dev team whom hasn't been in contact with me for a while, this is nothing new as he is very busy but it leads me to be very concerned that we may not be able to make the Sept  anniversary date, I will of course let you all know if this situation changes in the next week, I have been putting this announcement off but I feel it would be wrong to wait until the release day before mentioning something so important as this, to make up for this negative news I will be posting up some new screenshots for you all to look over and pass comment on.

 I hope you will all join me in having our fingers crossed for good luck, we most certainly need some at this time  :)

[Update ] Something to look over  :)

http://www.winmxworld.com/tutorials/ourmx_client_updates.html
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on September 11, 2014, 05:55:47 pm
Some nice progress shown in those screenshots! :)
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Plum on September 23, 2014, 05:45:07 am
Why shut down if the ports are in use? Just don't connect  but send the user to the port configuration page or automatically attempt another one.

I still see no work involving the ability to connect as primary or any real protocol changes (other than adding Open Nap support).

But it is good to see work is being done.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: silicon_toad2000 on September 23, 2014, 07:19:05 am
Maybe I misunderstand, OurMX connects as primary fine, once it looses trhose initial primary it gets lazy and doesn't look for any more.

There's unlikely to be any key protocol changes until OurMX is working acceptably.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on September 23, 2014, 08:51:17 am
That is pretty much correct Toad, after doing some research the problem is actually one of program  flow, the primary is not actually losing any of the connections as evidenced by using xnetstat and watching the live network  connections, what seems to be occurring is that the loop in the program that takes care of connection status is not dynamically updating, i believe this is to do with a lack of internal messaging of the events to the relevant counters, this then gives the impression of the loss of primary connections and the yellow flashing icon etc when in reality connections still exist, its in an area that's time sensitive, as I found out when working on some routine in that area.

One of the other developers is having a go at reworking that whole area to both improve the flow by a possibly different threading mechanism and other code changes to work past what is an annoying bug, due to the interdependency of the code to the rest of the client this is not seen as a simple fix but progress has been made and we do expect to see the end code looking more lean and functional when the rework is completed

I do often feel a disconnect between what I know works and what people have been saying works or does not but I fully understand this is a problem of having so few beta releases to fall back on and build user confidence, the attitude atm amongst those who have tried it seems to be mirrored by the following observation: that its a beta so a lot of stuff dont work and theres little patience to test further, when the reality is that once a few annoying bugs are put in context we have something powerful  to build on. Under the hood the majority of the core functions are fully working, both primary and secondary client types work as does the inbuilt chat server and many of the key areas necessary to file share, beta one has a major issue in downloading files in primary mode due to a bad handshaking mechanism , but downloading and uploading work at a basic level in secondary, we have then the bones of whats necessary and theres been a lot of time spent working on filling out the further areas of the client to bring you nearly every function that you are used to , at the present time further reworking is taking place to standardise some area of code following on from a review of the client globally after many individual area have been completed. It makes sense i hope to use the same successful routines program wide when looking back at what we have in hand shows major variation in what should be identical routines, this is an issue of the scale and bit by bit construction method used, it is being approached in a professional manner and commenting of the src code has increased to bring us further along  in making the whole codebase ready for open sourcing in the future, this is then the rationale behind what will be critical network changes, to get further developers involved whom may not come from within our community pool we have to have our code open to all to bring more spare hands to bear on both minor and major code areas, and with the current protocol making this a fruitless exercise ie the trade off between hoped for developer interest versus the risk to the networks users given the scope of exploitable knowledge available in the client src we have reached a stalemate in terms of  making anything public until key changes are agreed and actioned.

At the current time there are still areas of the client that need completing and finalising but once those have been completed I will look to the community for both serious discussion of any proposed protocol level changes and what form they should take given the current wish not to publicise in fine detail the exploitable areas of the existing network, I am sure there is a sensible balance to be found in having such a discussion but make no mistake we do need to have it and reach a conclusion on the way ahead, the developers cannot build on sand and all should devote some time to researching technical methods and networking idiosyncrasies to assist with the effort of both stabilising our current protocol and looking deep into the future for the way ahead.

In response to Plum  :)

Work goes on each day to try to add, improve and in the end deliver OurMx to the community, the bottle neck is as always coder time and we do our best to tackle this using organisational strategies such as assigning selected areas to individual developers but there are only so many hours in the day, I had wished to show the community the major sized amount of work that has been delivered over the last year but having had a year to read through much of the commentary of those using OurMx for the first time is was felt that perhaps we need to nail a lot more areas before casting the program to the wind, there was ans still is a lot of negativity and little grasp amongst the community of the huge constructional milestones that where delivered in beta 1, I agree it wasn't fully completed and had many bugs to contend with but we are addressing the majority of these areas of discontentment in beta 2, much will be new and fully functional upon release time to ensure disappointment levels do not reach the same numbers originally seen following the initial burst of positive commendations. 
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Plum on September 23, 2014, 11:49:24 am
I asked about the primary because it didn't work for me last time. I forget if it never connected, or just wouldn't search and download. Yes, I know all about firewall settings, ports, exceptions, etc., so it wasn't any of that. WinMX runs perfectly for me except the flooding issue.

Yes, using a "runtime library" approach makes sense to me. You should have a lot of standardized subroutines/functions and call them, except in time-critical places where using it inline or even abbreviating it would make sense to get rid of the overhead of the prologue/epilogue conventions. And if you prefer to work in a compartmentalized way, then you can document your APIs so others can use them without having to see them.

I am not sure the protocol details should be shared, but you could open the rest of the interface to open source. Then if someone wanted a G2 client that looked like WinMX/OurMX, they could make one - just take your interface and maybe the Gnucleus library (GnucDNA or whatever they called it) and add the routines to call in the GnucDNA code. The nice part about that approach is if there are problems with the protocol, one replaces the protocol DLL without recompiling the main executable. And you might want to try that approach of putting the protocol in a library and distributing just the blob to those who want to use the protocol, and thus one group maintains the protocol, thus conformance and patches are insured.

I hate what happened with a lot of the good networks that used non-Gnutella protocols. Kazaa was a good network, but its client contained spyware. I don't remember if the original Shareaza used its network or not, but once Kazaa went under, I think Kazaa quit working, and then both the recording industry and an open source group got the source code. I was trying to find it to install it after not having used it for a while and I downloaded a fake version of "Shareaza" where it said I had to pay to use it. I removed it and then found it on SourceForge. But it was not as robust as the usual. Then the Gnucleus guy invented the G2 protocol, and Shareaza used G1, G2, eDonkey2k, and Bearshare as its protocols. Then there was WinMx, but we are taking care of that situation and filling the niche.

Then there were filesharing clients that disappeared because of lawsuits, threats, or political pressures. There was once an Aimster, where some gal named Amy came out with a client until AOL threatened to sue over the name. So it became Madster until it went under.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on September 23, 2014, 08:15:01 pm
This network wont go under without a fight, even the attackers know that no one here will ever give up, we might come and go but we are patient.

I have looked at other network architecture's and protocols and in the main they fall into a few camps with kazza and Gnutella 6 being the most similar to the WPN, I don't think theres the wish to create an entirely new primary networking system so the way ahead is to fix the weaknesses in the upper tier backbone, there are a few ways to achieve this but all will entail an increased network cost, we can no longer rely on the honesty of previously trusted developers who have a bad day and want to trash the entire network for what amount to pathetic personal reasons, a new protocol should be safe to use against even the most knowledgable developer, only with this level of protection can we finally say never again, so far we have lost hundreds of thousands of users because of  Michael Jones tantrum, at the time I told folks it was necessary to block him distributing the hitherto securely held information across the network, many of his fanbois copied the data and shared it with literally anyone who wanted it breaking the chain of trust and responsibility built up over many years, the root of all our problems lay with his traitorous act against this community, 

I mention all of this as I have now always to consider a rogue or disgruntled developers capabilities when judging the potential success of otherwise of any anti attacker mechanism, this is the new "level" of secure decentralisation we have to achieve if we are to regrow the network and ensure finally that no one is in charge of it, its not a simple solution we seek but we must endeavour to deliver it and to share the mechanism openly for others to employ also , there can be no "winmx gods", all are equal and all should remember they also hold the same community responsibility to keep this network alive as the skilled developers who work towards those aims, free riding should be a dirty word when the community needs urgent help.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Plum on October 04, 2014, 11:21:45 am
Any more news?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on October 04, 2014, 01:14:40 pm
Any more news?

honestly? not the best kind... but its still moving along...
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on October 04, 2014, 03:51:40 pm
Indeed it is.

When its possible to gather all the ourmx development folks together for a code merging event you can all get your hands on the next beta, until then I can only ask for your patience, no ones more eager than myself to enjoy the fruits of such labour  :-D
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Plum on October 11, 2014, 07:57:09 am
Just checking in...
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on October 11, 2014, 09:02:38 am
No problem Plum  :D

Things are still progressing well and I have a few days booked off from work to try to regain some ground, while I wait till the other devs are able to bring their work to the communial table further bugfixing feature placement and improvements will continue, we have a nice mound of code at this stage and it can only get better with time, I received a message recently suggesting we could have the next beta done within a matter of weeks but atm thats not firm but I will from this end treat it as firm when deciding on what work  is to be prioritised, the opennap version is scheduled for beta 3 after all so that will be shoved to the back of the pile and other wpn specific areas will be focused on with a view to making things smooth and fully operational.

As always cheers for your patience and interest. 8)
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Plum on October 16, 2014, 02:06:47 pm
No problem Plum  :D

Things are still progressing well and I have a few days booked off from work to try to regain some ground, while I wait till the other devs are able to bring their work to the communial table further bugfixing feature placement and improvements will continue, we have a nice mound of code at this stage and it can only get better with time, I received a message recently suggesting we could have the next beta done within a matter of weeks but atm thats not firm but I will from this end treat it as firm when deciding on what work  is to be prioritised, the opennap version is scheduled for beta 3 after all so that will be shoved to the back of the pile and other wpn specific areas will be focused on with a view to making things smooth and fully operational.

As always cheers for your patience and interest. 8)

Yes, I'm still around waiting for something more usable. In the mean time I use Shareaza. Another project I am following is ReactOS.  It is slowly coming into shape.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on November 18, 2014, 10:44:53 pm
i hate to stir this thread but its been a while since the last post.... how is the new client coming along? things going good? bad? indifferent?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on November 18, 2014, 11:49:05 pm
Anytime is good for me Stripes  :)

I have successfully added the browse filter window feature many have requested and have made a lot of barely mentionable bug fixes but I am currently fighting with one particular area of code thats used ( and failing   :(  ) in 3 places and would be a decent bug to resolve, as usual a lot of redundant code has been removed and work is going on to update and smooth over many other functions,  I got bored last month so I have also embarked on a major rewrite of the upload download engine to follow the design model, it was originally legacy code and whilst it works its not offering the functionality we need and with time to spare until another of the programmers appears I thought I need to get on with that also, feel free to ask  about any specific issue that has your interest as so much goes on I often forget whats been done across this year.

The user experience is a lot smoother but I could do with with some assistance from the community elves *cough*   ;)
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on November 26, 2014, 09:37:48 pm
Added a few more updates to the usual location displaying recent OurMx development progress, I hope those of you who requested browse filtering will be pleased and reassured we are listening to your requests.

http://www.winmxworld.com/tutorials/ourmx_client_updates.html
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: MSmithy on December 13, 2014, 01:29:35 am
Sorry, I have been away for quite some time. What is the ETA on the updated new client?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on December 13, 2014, 03:23:44 am
I stopped giving out ETA's a while ago MSmthy  :oops:

There are a few areas still to complete and bring up to expected standard, we are still facing a critical shortage of coders but with the holidays coming up and our team getting time off work we may be able to get some of those problem areas resolved and a new release ready, we have come a long way since the initial release but with a small crew doing the work as well as the research and the planning/design etc we are in effect still crawling along when with further non-dev assistance we could be making better speed.

As I type we are still working on the OurMx client as we do most nights, I cant say anything more than that except  to ask you to look over the progress updates of late to see whats being achieved and how far is left to go, we can all agree we need this badly, other issues however take up time such as my concern regarding when are folks going to rally around to work out all the other issues that a decent release will bring, distribution, publicity, small beta tester groups who can be trusted with "in progress"  versions to test smaller parts that would be an issue on a general community beta, all of these things take "thinking time" away from what the dev team should be doing, some days there has been no one around who can be trusted to test some features and not share the version under test, this is what is being faced and adds to the delays, back in the day when KM and others where hard at work I would run support, if data was required I would find it, if something was unknown I would work out the answers, this isn't being done by anyone in the current community as they perhaps feel isolated from the project but given this is a primary level project and a leak could do a whole extra level of damage that's had to be the case, but that's not a real reason for folks to sit on their thumbs when theres support work that we still need to speed the whole project along as well as create infrastructure for other developers when we go open src, by this I mean documentation of the client code wont write itself etc, all of this falls to the current small team when in many cases this load could be shared collectively.

So..  Short answer is asap, but it would be refreshing to see more folks offering to self manage assistance in areas that are currently stealing  developer time, rest assured we will get there but ... we can get there faster if we start to work as a team of users again as we have done in the past when troubles raised its head, those with skills need to make themselves known and coordinate to be a part of this ever increasing project, we have a dream, we need to turn that into solid reality and focus our efforts accordingly.

As always thanks for your interest and your patience.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Plum on January 24, 2015, 05:07:58 am
Anything I can do to help? I don't currently code.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on January 24, 2015, 05:41:12 pm
Coding is just the sharp end of the project Plum, theres so much to do to bring things to a happy conclusion and of late things are mounting against us in terms of time, our main coder is pretty much busy with real life work most of the time the past year leaving myself to continue the battle with whoever I can press gang into work, however last month I had to change employment myself and with longer hours I am very concerned that our dream is sliding in the wrong direction.

To deal with the coder shortage problem I have spoke to a few helpful community folks who advised me to get some parts of the client into open src so others could help out during such times when the actual dev team are over committed, so I have stolen some time from our main work project to work on a secondary version of the client that can serve two purposes, one is to get more folks looking at what sort of coding ability we need and the style that's used in the OurMx client and two is for those folks to bring bug fixes, updates and new code additions that can in many cases be ported forward into the main build, this is the only real hope we have to get the client completed in a fair time span. Its a firm belief that with good luck and and community commitment we can spot and gain new coding talent and induct them into the main dev group to complete the primary client build, lets be fair here its well overdue and we need fresh engines to help spur us past the finish line, I will contact you privately to discuss what avenues you can best render support for this project, my thanks for your fine offer  8) 8) 8)
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: JOSE on January 26, 2015, 10:09:07 pm
I exposed you liars 2 years ago, remember? when you said ourmx was almost done.

Since then you have missed numerous deadlines and lied continuously.

Sept 2014 you said "we have just missed the deadline for completion".

The reality is that ourmx is dead in the water, a lost cause and the developers know it.

There has been no updates for months although Ghost claims to have no time
but continues to post rubbish about subjects that he has spent hours trawling the net for.

Give it up and tell the truth to people your project is doomed to failure
you have taken way too long on a simple app, Microsoft have created
3 versions of windows in less time than you have taken.

I expect this post to be deleted and a ban but that is the way you lot operate.

LIARS.

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on January 26, 2015, 10:49:25 pm
How can I be a liar when I have my copy of visual studio open permanently on my machine, I admit to making a few posts on the site and looking for p2p related articles that I feel provide some clues as to the direction of the anti p2p folks and their focus, are you simply angry with us because we cant in fact lie to you and say all the work is done etc ?

I haven't posted any new images for a while simply because the area I have been focusing on prior to about 3 weeks ago was the transfers code, theres not much to see in there really.

OurMx would be almost done if others helped out Dai, I would have thought that you could comprehend the simple truth of  "many hands make light work", conversely  few hands to a task makes for long delays and many unsatisfied folks.
When Microsoft's programming team of at least 450 coders working 365 days a year have time to spend on OurMX I will put them to work, until then its a rather uneven comparison.

The forum rules state that as long as you don't swear your post will remain where it is simply because theres no lies to hide, I have made our situation clear at each opportunity its been requested, in the first 2 years we had more folks on the job so we saw more throughput of work, in the last year or so its been considerably less so far from lying I have been honest and mentioned such unscheduled delays in my posts, what is it that you actually want of anyone as it seems you haven't posted anything here to support the community or ever help anyone to my knowledge so  is this simply your way of getting some attention for yourself ?

I am sympathetic to the poor state of the network and share the frustration of all of you regarding when action can be taken to fix the damage caused by another famous attention seeker but please bear in mind I didn't create these network issues and I and the rest of the dev team give up our free time to work on both practical and theoretical solutions that can be employed when we have the hands to implement them, we can choose to either be part of the solution and have faith or shout abuse as you seem to be doing from the sidelines but in reality you are in fact deluding yourself as I for one know that OurMX will reach the end of the road with a public release, even if it's many years hence, its simply a challenge for me and thus I don't have to prove anything to anyone bar myself, if I wanted to give up as you have I could simply do so, I have chosen not to because unlike you Dai I want to be able to say to myself each day I did the best I could to hold our community together for as long as I could, many others here share that goal and mentality.

Ask yourself just what it is you want of us when posting as without such focus your post seems a collection of frustrated and angry soundbites that creates a feeling of sympathy for you but does not achieve anything satisfying for either of us. 
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: silicon_toad2000 on January 27, 2015, 02:10:12 am
maybe ourmx is doomed to failure, maybe not. Why should the developers give up?

if you want ourmx to be a dead project, easy, go away and never look back, then as far as you are concerned it will never come to life.

You have been deleted and banned before because you only come here to troll, is it any different this time?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on January 27, 2015, 03:58:42 am
Remember this project is not being done by robots. There are human beings behind the posts here and it's not fair or decent to speak about people here the way you just did Dai. No one is getting paid to work on this project, no one has sold you anything so don't be so hostile.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: wonderer on January 27, 2015, 05:58:54 am

When Microsoft's programming team of at least 450 coders working 365 days a year have time to spend on OurMX I will put them to work, until then its a rather uneven comparison.

GOD beware that ever happens
we would be saddled up with security hole fixes about every month :D
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: zeexen on January 27, 2015, 11:01:53 pm
Why do you call the new client "Ourmx"?
I'm ( and a lot of people) are used to WinMX. Every single computer i owned has winmx installed. Currently i have 4 computers with winmx.

Maybe it's because I'm so used with Winmx ( using it since 2000 ) that ourmx sounds a bit strange.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on January 27, 2015, 11:31:32 pm
Originally the project was codenamed "MxShare" by myself but it was thought we should let the folks decide and in a somewhat small public vote OurMX won the day  :)
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Plum on January 28, 2015, 01:33:15 am
I think I know who the naysayer is based on precedent. I imagine there is some sock puppetry at work, but be that as it may. I don't see any evidence that anyone is intentionally lying. That is what happens at software projects. Everyone starts out optimistic, but then coders leave, or there are budget cuts (if this were a commercial project), or unforeseen challenges occur. You might assume you know a protocol or an API set, but you find it is not as simple as anticipated. If this were a commercial project with a legal team, all the coders could be given access to the entire thing, after signing an NDA or something and agreeing not to leak it.

Yes, WinMX is a more familiar name, but we need our  own. We respect the original work and don't want to step on that. MyMX might have more of a ring to it, but it would be confusing, much like the "My Computer"  icon. That has confused a lot of customers calling tech support. "I want you to go to My Computer and open it." "How do I get into your computer?" "No I mean the icon with the name on your desktop." "Well my computer doesn't have a My Computer icon." So I guess Microsoft got wise to that and just called it Computer. OurMX is less confusing of a name than MyMX and honors the community spirit.

Going sideways with open source might be helpful. If nothing else, make a Gnutella-based program with an MX-style GUI, if the GUI is a challenge. I say Gnutella-based since that code is readily available and can be just plugged in with minimal effort. So the interface would just be a wrapper for a standard G2 client. Then once other coders improve the GUI, that could be imported back into OurMX. And for protocol stuff, if you don't want to open it up, is that you could make projects that use chunks of the code you would use, then you can recombine it from those projects into your own. And make sure you have an open source license type that lets the original author retain all rights to the original and remain free to use it outside the license (and the license applying only to the derivatives of the public source), or whatever. I mean, you'd hate to end up GPLing yourself out of what you want to do.

And yes, PM me if there is something I can do.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: p2psafer on June 15, 2015, 07:23:27 pm
Hi,

Glad to see there are still some folks that haven't given up yet, even if things look pretty slow at the moment.

I'm an old fan of WInMX, and IMO, none of other p2p software ever offered all in one such a simplicity, speed though a reasonable anonymity, community builder. This is sad to see how the network is dying for good. I know how hard it can be to rewrite a whole progam like this, especially only on spare time. I even wrote my own client, but never finish it due to lack of time/motivation and small knowledge of the primary protocol to make it a full usable Winmx replacement

I'm wondering if u have considered some other shortcuts to bring it into life. The weak point is much about the primary protocol weaknesses. So why not just replacing it while still keeping the WinMX application as it is ? It would be much much less work to plug an alternate primary protocol (known and proved robust) through used DLL (like oledlg), or through user proxy setup. User connecting as secondary would actually connect to the localhost new protocol server, and communication between both of them would mimic regular WPNP.  Both primary protocols would still be used for a while (like emule uses Kad & eDonkey) letting the new network growing and getting some primary servers,  and until enough users have switched to the new update.

Obviously, there's a lot of think/work to do, but it looks like to be a much reachable goal

What do you think of it ? Am I just raving ? :D



Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 15, 2015, 08:30:52 pm
The hurdle for the development team is pretty much one of time, whilst we can work on OurMX pretty much exclusively we cant do that whilst redesigning the protocols and gathering community agreement about just whats acceptable in terms of any changes, I agree this is the best time ever to update and upgrade the whole network but the effort has to come via many and at the current time all of this resides on the backs of a few a small few if truth be told.

What I have proposed before and am taking this opportunity to do so again is to ask for not just theoretical concepts but practical examples of potential network  improvements, if a framework of secure technology can be built within or around our existing network topography and specifically adds additional hurdles to network attackers of all wallet sizes I think the community can rally once again and pick up the baton moving us all forward to a better future, what has anyone to lose by adding their input ? 

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on June 17, 2015, 12:38:33 am
theoretical concepts are unfortunately what it boils down to.... and a modified gnutella client... modified to connect to its 'own' blocklist protected gnutella network and have winmx chat built in with a different method for listing channels so old chat servers and new alike can be connected to...

chat seems to be the only real thing holding winmx together so... it makes the most sense anyway considering the winmx source was and most likely never will be made available...
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 18, 2015, 05:27:16 am
The availability or otherwise of the WinMx src is not really relevant at this stage as the whole ideal is to work past such limitations to allow for a flexible future, the main issue facing us is simply one of defeating spoofed traffic that leads to excessive network management activity, gnutella is also prone to the same attacks the WPN is suffering however they mitigate the problem firstly by increasing the quantity of peers at the hop 1 stage and with some intelligent search query handling as a step up from the simple query flooding technique we see on the WPN.

A malicious peer with enough knowledge will still be able to generate  a substantial attack  using the current models for either network and thus the solution lies in ensuring a method exists for managing peers to be able to authenticate the traffic from other such peers and disallow malicious or modified traffic before it can reach a level that draws in an excessive quantity of network resources, the trust model for our network is broken, if we can resolves this problem using a cryptographic solution or by adding a novel feature that addresses this conceptual level weakness we can turn the tide in our favour.

I apologise to some of you for the verbosity of whats being posted here but anyone capable of  addressing our problem will doubtless be able to comprehend our needs and look at possible methods to address the problem outlined, I believe we have many intelligent community members out there and having now outlined the key problem I welcome potential solutions that can successfully address it, As mentioned a working example will be of more usage than a concept alone but lets see what we can dig up between us.

Lend us your brains  8)
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: wonderer on June 20, 2015, 01:24:37 am
its like a coconut
the shell is hard the inside soft
once you find the eyes in the shell the inside is eaten easy
we are looking for the way to make the inside less easy to eat

correct me if its different fruit
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on June 20, 2015, 10:16:25 pm
now: sliding shoe for search... snubbing for primary node flood (torrent snubs misbehaving clients)... and adapting the cache servers to store channel names (and ofc channel hash)...

future: SSL(or TLS.. you pick) for packet sniffing... hmmmm... hashed 'slices' so a file does not get damaged in xfer (anything over 50mb is a coin toss for me... always has been on mx).....

absolutely needed now: programmers (college students?) ... personally id put all of ourmx on github and let ppl poke new code into it as needed... the wpn is on its very last legs... no sense in hiding anything anymore...
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 20, 2015, 11:21:32 pm
I still dont see the army of supposed coders hiding out on github who might be interested in this network because put simply none have surfaced at all in the last 4 years despite us reaching out at intervals into p2p programming circles, to be honest I dont care for github at all and I understand that all "native" developers for this network that I have spoken to share a responsibility to do their utmost to ensure what is left of the network remains operational, that would cease to be the case if OurMx was handed over to those whom have no interest in this network bar its usage as a ddos engine for malcontents, I can say with my hand on my heart that I would oppose any such release as the client sits, with modifications to remove such potential exploits I would support such a release.

We are stuck as a community in a loop of chicken and egg atm, do we go ahead unilateraly and make changes without agreement with the community developers etc or do we wait until they back a proffered solutions such as sliding shoe or one of the others that folks have put foward, its going to cause disruption whatever happens it seems simply because there is no single authority for network development or even a basic group of ad hoc developers in discussion with others whom have an interest in this network, being no one is in charge it will likely come down to a breakaway group at some stage and that could be the final nail in the coffin, it may on the other hand be the great reviver of our fortunes but its a brave man who is going to take that route without agreements on the way ahead and before that takes place folks need to agree to discuss, now is a good time to undertake this sort of discussion as part of the way ahead I would be happy to take part in such discussions myself should a group get together to discuss our future but importantly this needs to happen in an honest and timely fashion with all such discussions being made public and transparent, in this way any propsed changes can be relayed to the rest of the networks users for their thoughts and discussions as well as just for the general heads up on whats being discussed and why, does anyone have the time and inclination to form such a group aimed at guiding our community into a an enhanced and stable future rather than one with an outcome result of mistrust and recrimination ?




   
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on June 21, 2015, 04:19:34 am
We've put RoboMX and Metis on github and we intend to put RCS 2.0 on there, an open chat server for the network later this year. Mostly so people with an interest can vet the codebase and make the changes they want and of course fork it to use as a base for their own server variants. The user on github called RenMX will be turned into an organisation later this year and all the projects from us will live together there.

As of right now we have RoboMX and Metis under the MXControl user on Github and people can start going through those, forking and making changes today.

I do think collaboration in the open is important. Not everyone has time to commit to a project full time and with the way code is transferred between interested parties it creates boundaries. Github is used by everyone now, it's the defacto standard when it comes to code collaboration and it really cannot be beat.

If OurMX is not destined to live there or to be open sourced at all then that's your choice of course, but calling it OurMX when we can't see the source or make any changes to it is probably sending the wrong message, it's not really "ours", and I know it was chosen by committee but I didn't see WinMX get asked about it, sorry if I missed the poll or discussion on that on the forums.

I strongly believe that WinMX shouldn't just be "owned" by a few individuals. The users are the most important part and I think they should have the sources of the tools they use. Maybe I'm too far down the GNU ladder for some with that statement but that's how I feel about it. If OurMX were to be put up on Github I would contribute when I have time, I would certainly use the client then as I know if I find things that annoy me I could fix myself on github and recompile it. As it is now I don't have interest when we already have WPCC with feature parity to OurMX and also Seans client Mato which also has feature parity and is also closed source. We've had enough closed sourced projects end when the developers go, it's time to make things open and not tied to just one or two individuals I think.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 21, 2015, 11:04:37 am
I'm not sure why you have skipped over the important point made but for the sake of clarity I will make it again, whilst there are potential exploits due to using the existing WPN protocol it would be foolhardy to release the OurMx src, you are aware what occurred last time src was released before it was sensible to do so and we are still paying for that now, 4 years of trouble and userbase loss because of shortsighted actions, forgive me for not wishing to see any such repeat.

To confirm : The name was chosen by forum members in the open here not by any committee so yes you did miss the vote but it was indeed open.

I agree collaboration is the way ahead that much we do agree on but I don't think its wise to put potential tools of mass destruction into the hands of fools, I have chosen those whom help on Ourmx and thus far we haven't had any unwanted src releases and no ones been impacted in any adverse way, you have been consistent in what you have said and so I need to follow suit, neither you nor anyone else (bar current OurMx developers) is giving any firm or binding undertaking to work on OurMx to fix up the known issues, these include the major protocol flaws I have been speaking of for many years.

I think we do need to take stock of where we are but more importantly this is not about github and open src at this stage its time we all made our way to a chat room and worked on what we need to do to remove the barriers to open src,  discuss protocol fixes and address such problems prior to throwing our "seed" to the wind, when we have done some planning we may well find we are in a good place and can move forward as one community, I too look ahead and believe the ethic of freedom for all , there should be no one person or group controlling anything and this has been followed in the cache system and other areas but allowing ourselves to become impatient instead of addressing a problem is not what I want to expect from anyone whom I believe is a code professional, "us" and "them" does not work , we haven't prefixed "winmxworld" onto all of our projects simply because we believe in the ideal of real community and ourselves being a part of that and not simply empire building for ourselves.

Forgive me for this but "feature parity"  :lol: :lol: :lol:

I affirm that for me the users are the most important aspect of this community, whilst I admit to sensing apathy amongst the userbase when it comes to ridding ourselves of the attacking plague we all know that deep down we have to put back in whatever we are able to when we see the opportunity and collectively we can all walk tall, to remains a community we do however have to cast aside our own limitations and enjoin with others to build the golden future we all want, discussion and cooperation is the key to that particular door.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: hollow87 on June 21, 2015, 01:35:38 pm
Since you have said in the past the exploits are really on the primary portion maybe make a the code able to have a conditional compile and make it so you can remove/add the primary portion with a simple #define statement, or put the primary code in a dynamically linked library that only gets linked at run time with the said define statement, then put the code on GitHub just as the secondary client only no primary code.

Can even put the full code base in a PRIVATE GitRepo either on GitHub or GitLab or BitBucket or somewhere else, that way you don't have to keep just zipping up the code and passing it around among who ever is currently developing it.

Another thing would be that if you have used any GPL code in your code (RoboMX is GPL) already you must follow the instructions of the GPL which includes licensing the deriviitve work under a license compatible with GPL and releasing the source.

That is the reason why Bender made his code GPL other people who used his work for future projects would have release their code as open source as well

Also the point of GitHub would be the code would be out there for people who are willing to commit not all their times but just small portions of if here and there to developing it.  You would even have a proper issue/bug tracker rather than using a SMF forum as a bug tracker.

At the moment I do not have a butt load of time to devote to this project however I would be willing to take a peek now and then at an issue tracker and the code to see if can't knock down 1 bug.  But the current way you guys share the code between one another does not work in a decentralized environment. 

Do the right thing release at least the secondary code on GitHub in a public repo if you need a private repo and don't want to pay the low fee GitHub charges for one I can offer a couple alternatives including BitBucket and GitLab (haven't tried GitLab yet but it looks very promising may start moving my private repo's there) then it can finally be called OurMX and actually mean it right now it's more like YourMX with how closed it is after promises of open source.

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 21, 2015, 02:23:33 pm
It stagger me how selfish folks have become, when you guys want something you fly out of the woodwork talking about how the OurMx developers have to "do the right thing" when its clear neither of those asking for the src release have taken that same ethic on board.

I don't remember either of you helping to create OurMx nor offer one single line of code to it,  unlike Pri Hollow was asked to join the effort back when OurMx was just getting started as MxShare, is it now our fault you have sat in the wings for the last 4 years Hollow ?

Re-read the post above your own and address the points made, perhaps then progress can be made, I have a lot of time for this community but in real life I am mega busy with new work commitments so I fully understand that for the community to move ahead and  reach the place we all want to be we have to work as a virtual team and act without placing our personal feelings into this matter, OurMx is worth the time and focus of the whole community but it seem many have no time for it but wish to work on projects that we already have by the bucket load such as chat servers and chat clients, that's great for them personally but in the big picture its time wasted and users lost, please address the real issue here of creating an environment that will deliver the way ahead and please don't spend your focus on whether OurMx will be put on github to be forked off under some other name as that to me is the height of despicable behaviour.

I am fully aware btw of the GPL requirements and have been very selective on what third party code is included in OurMx and where it comes from and what may require replacing at times, but be assured it would in my opinion be preferable to delete the entire OurMx project than to allow some two bit attackers access to the primary code as it sits at this time, that's my commitment and responsibility to carry, something I cant say I am seeing from those whom are impatient to rush into things without expanding their minds to the potential adverse consequences of such actions.

I spoke to Hollow back in February about creating a secondary only OurMx but with the loss of a developer at that time and with the start of a new job doing longer hours I personally didnt manage to remove the primary code successfully without causing the remaining client to crash, without further coder support such things are problems and the question has to be asked as to whether its best to go forward and get community agreement on proposals for change or just deliver a secondary client that brings us no further forward but would expand the quantity of coder access to our community, its not something thats easy to judge and at times both paths are being taken thus in fact impeding the very real battle to move ahead in either direction.

Now I apologise if this has become heated as thats not my core aim, I just feel at this stage that we need to set up a discussion location to work past these small hurdles and create a single cohesive plan to work forward as one and face the problems that prevent us going the open src route that we all want, I do ask for some serious thought from all who care about this network and further for some sensible minds to jump forward at this stage to help manage this for the good of the community, squabbles and annoyances are wasted time, something we don't have to spare.

 

 
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on June 21, 2015, 04:51:18 pm
I'm not sure why you have skipped over the important point made but for the sake of clarity I will make it again, whilst there are potential exploits due to using the existing WPN protocol it would be foolhardy to release the OurMx src

Okay first of all, the network is already under deliberating attacks. Chat rooms are being crashed, searches don't work, users are being PM bombed at this very moment and the channel list does not load.

But looking past the attacks that are going on right now, you don't have to open source the primary protocol. It can be included in the project at compile time as a closed sourced component downloaded by the compiler. Only the actual client itself needs to be open sourced. Danger averted.

Forgive me for this but "feature parity"  :lol: :lol: :lol:

You're forgiven, I forgot Mato already has file transfers working and is functional.


It stagger me how selfish folks have become, when you guys want something you fly out of the woodwork talking about how the OurMx developers have to "do the right thing" when its clear neither of those asking for the src release have taken that same ethic on board.

It staggers me how you can frame this situation like this. We essentially say, if you want the project to succeed you need to open it up so everyone can work on it and we're the selfish ones? - How about you're the selfish one demanding everyone jump through your hoops to get a look at the source and to help with it? - I don't want you as a gatekeeper, you're impossible to work with. I just want the source in a place I can contribute without having to deal with you.

Use a GPL license. No one will be able to distribute their changes without providing source. But at this point if you wait too long an open source client is going to happen and then all this current effort will be wasted.

I don't remember either of you helping to create OurMx nor offer one single line of code to it,  unlike Pri Hollow was asked to join the effort back when OurMx was just getting started as MxShare, is it now our fault you have sat in the wings for the last 4 years Hollow ?

When it was called MXShare it was just a modified RoboMX. And honestly I didn't see that the project was ever going to materialise.

Re-read the post above your own and address the points made, perhaps then progress can be made, I have a lot of time for this community but in real life I am mega busy with new work commitments so I fully understand that for the community to move ahead and  reach the place we all want to be we have to work as a virtual team and act without placing our personal feelings into this matter,

That's pretty much why I've said to use Github several times. People wouldn't need to talk we can just work on the client in our own time and you can view the code being submitted and either add it to the mainline or not. Full source change history, reversion etc

Lets be frank here, I have no interest in being a beta tester for the client when I cannot go in and fix things just like with a click of my fingers. If it was on github I would run the client 24.7 as my main WinMX and I would fix everything that annoys me by submitting the changes back to the project on github or bitbucket or wherever it was hosted that has proper source control.

OurMx is worth the time and focus of the whole community but it seem many have no time for it but wish to work on projects that we already have by the bucket load such as chat servers and chat clients, that's great for them personally but in the big picture its time wasted and users lost, please address the real issue here of creating an environment that will deliver the way ahead and please don't spend your focus on whether OurMx will be put on github to be forked off under some other name as that to me is the height of despicable behaviour.

First of all, maybe you don't use the chat that much to understand the problems there, but we have a spammer who goes in everyones rooms spamming messages and he also now spams PM inboxes. So users now have to turn off their "Receive PM's from Chat Room" setting just so they don't get letter bombed with 100's of PM's in a few minutes.

We also have the most popular chat server on the network (WCS) able to be crashed at any time an attacker feels like it without even being in the channel. We do not have the source code to the more recent versions of WCS because the programmers who made those forks don't want to share. So we are stuck with crude binary patching which will only work up to a point.

But that doesn't solve the spamming both in-room and in PM. For that we need a redesigned chat server. That's why RCS 2.0 is being made. It will have mechanisms to stop these spammers from getting in rooms so they cannot spam and it'll be fully open source from the first release so that people can fix issues, add features and best of all continue the project after we're gone.

Finally you talk about people starting chat clients all the time. Well maybe if we had the source code to WPCC, probably the best WinMX clone in appearance and functionality we wouldn't need to start from scratch? Adapting RoboMX is what most have chosen to do, including yourself before abandoning that and starting over with OurMX.

I can tell you this, it would have been a lot easier to add primary protocol and upload/download support to WPCC which had the exact look and feel of real WinMX than it would have been to start over from nothing which is what OurMX, Mato and other clients I'm aware of have had to do.


I spoke to Hollow back in February about creating a secondary only OurMx but with the loss of a developer at that time and with the start of a new job doing longer hours I personally didnt manage to remove the primary code successfully without causing the remaining client to crash, without further coder support such things are problems and the question has to be asked as to whether its best to go forward and get community agreement on proposals for change or just deliver a secondary client that brings us no further forward but would expand the quantity of coder access to our community, its not something thats easy to judge and at times both paths are being taken thus in fact impeding the very real battle to move ahead in either direction.

Now I apologise if this has become heated as thats not my core aim, I just feel at this stage that we need to set up a discussion location to work past these small hurdles and create a single cohesive plan to work forward as one and face the problems that prevent us going the open src route that we all want, I do ask for some serious thought from all who care about this network and further for some sensible minds to jump forward at this stage to help manage this for the good of the community, squabbles and annoyances are wasted time, something we don't have to spare.

I understand you're busy and you also don't want to put primary code out there. It's not easy to rip out a core component if you've intertwined it with the rest of the client code. I know you're not a professional coder as you've honestly and without pretension admitted that many times.

The last thing I want to say is, if you don't want to open source it, that's fine. If it was me I'd probably change the name to GhostsMX though so we can have an open source client called OurMX instead.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 21, 2015, 05:19:58 pm
It seems once again that nothing thats being said is comprehended nor adressed fully, instead the questionable mantra of "release the OurMx src and we might fix something one day" is being spouted, sounds like a poor deal for the community to me and one I dont intend to bother with it if thats all your interested in.

I think I need to emulate others here and sit around castigating anyone who works on an MX related project for not handing it over to me so I can fork rebadge it.

Unless someone else step forward in the next week to work past anti-wmw entities I dont see any point in bothering to do anything, it seems the only ones interested in this community are the ones who want it called RENMX and thats not a network I wish to support nor will I.

My PM box is open to anyone who puts the whole community at the top of their list.







Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on June 21, 2015, 05:33:51 pm
It seems once again that nothing thats being said is comprehended nor adressed fully, instead the questionable mantra of "release the OurMx src and we might fix something one day" is being spouted, sounds like a poor deal for the community to me and one I dont intend to bother with it if thats all your interested in.

Yes I agree there is a lack of comprehension, on your end. As I just said if it was on github I would run the client 24.7 and fix everything that annoy me about the client. That could be minor things like text encoding problems, window form placements. And that could be big things like file transfers failing more often than not.

I think I need to emulate others here and sit around castigating anyone who works on an MX related project for not handing it over to me so I can fork rebadge it.

Ah so the truth comes out, you're afraid that someone will simply come along, fork it and work on it without you. Pretty egocentric that isn't it? If your quality of work is high people won't use a forked version and you would be free to integrate the changes from any forked versions back into the mainline client.

Unless someone else step forward in the next week to work past anti-wmw entities I dont see any point in bothering to do anything

And another closed source project bites the dust. Selfish, selfish, selfish.

it seems the only ones interested in this community are the ones who want it called RENMX and thats not a network I wish to support nor will I.

My PM box is open to anyone who puts the whole community at the top of their list.

Those of us who have worked together under the RenMX flag have done so for the betterment of all MX. Be that the room channel list with its open API to both submit and retrieve rooms from its database, to the proxy blocker API and client software which are also open source, to our changes to file finder and Metis. All open, all information shared.

We've always put users interests first giving people choice. Never abused our blocklist tools, never withholding the best tools that people need to keep secure. When we patched WCS did we have to share that? Did we have to take requests from the community for which versions they wanted patched?

It is so disingenuous for you to point your finger at us like we're some plague when we've been putting out stable usable software for the past half decade that is all open and truly free. You should be ashamed for talking about us like that but I am not surprised that you say it, this is your persona, if we're not sipping the Ghostship koolaid we're the drudges of WinMX.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 21, 2015, 05:53:06 pm
There is no time to waste on this, nor on your anti wmw rhetoric,

As I said in the last post if anyone is seriously interested in working for the benefit of the whole community I would be interested in a public chat room based technical/protocol discussional event so we could collectively move the community ahead without regard to whether Pri likes anyone or not, such motives have no place at this time
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on June 21, 2015, 05:57:58 pm
There is no time to waste on this, nor on your anti wmw rhetoric,

You're not WMW. I have a problem with you attacking RenMX. Toad, all the other people who work here are great. I just want that up for the record. Please note I never once said the words WinMXWorld or WMW once in this discussion.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 21, 2015, 06:01:09 pm
You and I both know why you dont have the src to OurMx and you may also have forgotten the rebadged cake patch episode but I havent, I think the problem here is that I have never put myself nor wmw first and it embaresses me to see others trying to do such things.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on June 21, 2015, 06:08:50 pm
You and I both know why you dont have the src to OurMx and you may also have forgotten the rebadged cake patch episode but I havent, I think the problem here is that I have never put myself nor wmw first and it embaresses me to see others trying to do such things.

You seem to be under the delusion that I personally want the source to OurMX to make some kinda RenMX clone out of it?. Everyone on here is telling you to open source it on github so the barriers to working on it are removed. I have also been asking Sean to open source Mato and he may do so. Again for the betterment of WinMX.

This way we would have an open source server and an open source client. Why doesn't hollow have the source? How about you answer that one? And I know why I don't have the source, because you're an egomaniac.

As for cake patch, I thought it'd be rather cool to have our own patch. I don't see the big deal. I never posted it anywhere, I never linked to it on our websites. The only people who had access to it were those who were given a direct link to its page and it was only ever shared in my own room with our own users.

And need I remind you, Tiny4eva came to me about the patch and said hey can you put a message on the page to give credit to Eagle for making it? Which I did immediately and then he offered to let me host a peercache as I had a dedicated server at the time and I hosted one for about a year or so. So don't even try to frame that like I'm some kinda asshole.

Facts are:
Amount of Open Source projects by Pri: 10+
Amount of Open Source projects by Ghostship: 0
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 21, 2015, 06:24:07 pm
"Everyone", don't you in fact mean you and Hollow who has been working alongside you for the last few years instead of assisting with OurMx when the call went out for more help ? Could that be the reason he doesn't have it either ?

I think you are what you are Pri and nothing I say one way or the other will make much difference, let the folks decide if I'm the person you claim as they are the only ones I try to work for anyway.

I don't know why I am even wasting my good time on you .. maybe I do, I thought that you had seen the error of your way and been looking to make amends and I am an old softy who likes a good ending (ask KM), it seems once someone acts a certain way they are doomed to repeat themselves, I cannot assist you further it seems and with me being "delusional" perhaps you too should no longer waste your own time eh  ;)
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on June 21, 2015, 06:37:31 pm
"Everyone", dont you in fact mean you and Hollow who has been working alongside you for the last few years instead of assisting with OurMx when the call went out for more help ? Could that be the reason he doesnt have it either ?

I think you are what you are Pri and nothing I say one way or the other will make much difference, let the folks decide if I'm the person you claim as they are the only ones I try to work for anyway.

I dont know why I am even wasting my good time on you .. maybe I do, I thought that you had seen the error of your way and been looking to make amends and I am an old softy who likes a good ending (ask KM), it seems once someone acts a ceratin way they are doomed to repeat themselves, I cannot assist you further it seems and with me being "delusional" perhaps you too should no longer waste your own time eh  ;)


I had to wade in originally because you were taking an anti-github stance in a discussion with White Stripes. Who said and I quote "personally id put all of ourmx on github".

Whitestrips has no affiliation with RenMX, he doesn't even come to my room and hasn't for years. And when I said everyone I was really referring to him, me and hollow. The people discussing Github in this thread with you. But Richy has also mentioned it on this forum it may even be earlier in this thread or another thread I forget which. And Josh also feels the same way in my personal discussions with him. Of course Josh is affiliated with RenMX so I imagine his opinion doesn't matter to you on this.

And you paint me like I'm some bad guy who hasn't changed his spots. I've not done anything bad, if you have facts you want to share with everybody to backup these libelous claims then please share them, I invite you to do so because I know I have a clear conscience as I have never done anything malicious, not in my personal life or on WinMX.

I think sometimes these rumors fly around so long people start believing them, I thought you were better than that Ghost, if I believed all the rumors about you I would think you were no better than a depraved rat but those kind of rumors swirl about all of us and are all proven to be untrue. I for example don't actually put backdoors in my software as the spammer would have people believe.

Last thing you say you want people to judge you as you are and stuff. Well a few posts ago you just said if no one helps you you'll pack the project in. Pretty selfish that. We're all saying we'll help if you let us, you say, we can't be trusted and so it's a vicious circle of "we'll help" and you going "don't want it" until the project is ultimately terminated by yourself for selfishness.

I look forward to the open sourcing of Mato, it's probably our best bet at this point folks.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: hollow87 on June 21, 2015, 06:47:12 pm
Ghostship you want OurMX to be finished I assume.  You say you don't have the time nor knowledge to finish it.  That alone is a reason to open source it.

You say you don't want people to fork it however when they do fork it you can still see the original repo.

Let's look at your reasons why you don't want people to fork OurMX (kinda against the name though if its not really Our's)

OurMx is worth the time and focus of the whole community but it seem many have no time for it but wish to work on projects that we already have by the bucket load such as chat servers and chat clients, that's great for them personally but in the big picture its time wasted and users lost, please address the real issue here of creating an environment that will deliver the way ahead and please don't spend your focus on whether OurMx will be put on github to be forked off under some other name as that to me is the height of despicable behaviour.

Now lets look at a GitHub fork.
(http://forum.winmxworld.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FMBROIGM.png&hash=b0e85a1a4955d6fbef4aa53104f7c498)

Looks like it says it was forked from mono/mono and it has a fork icon shall we look at the original repo now?
(http://forum.winmxworld.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F2LgQtI0.png&hash=815b8e2f8285e8f5e5ed3d792e04c216)

Hmm... that's odd its not forked from anywhere must be the original repo then icon is even different.

I don't remember either of you helping to create OurMx nor offer one single line of code to it,  unlike Pri Hollow was asked to join the effort back when OurMx was just getting started as MxShare, is it now our fault you have sat in the wings for the last 4 years Hollow ?

I'm sorry I don't have a lot of free time to devote to jumping through your hoops to contribute to OurMX I said if it was easier for me to contribute I would.  At which point you replied with saying about about making a secondary only one.

It seems once again that nothing thats being said is comprehended nor adressed fully, instead the questionable mantra of "release the OurMx src and we might fix something one day" is being spouted, sounds like a poor deal for the community to me and one I dont intend to bother with it if thats all your interested in.

I think I need to emulate others here and sit around castigating anyone who works on an MX related project for not handing it over to me so I can fork rebadge it.

Unless someone else step forward in the next week to work past anti-wmw entities I dont see any point in bothering to do anything, it seems the only ones interested in this community are the ones who want it called RENMX and thats not a network I wish to support nor will I.

My PM box is open to anyone who puts the whole community at the top of their list.

Kinda funny I'm pretty sure that's what I am thinking about here.  Without it being open source it wont survive.  If you used any of RoboMX code still it needs to be open source under a GPL license else your just as guilty as "rebranding" as a normal looking github fork.

And to say we are not thinking about the community that is just shameful where would OurMX be without YOU having access to RoboMX where it be without Nushi releasing MXSock code.  Where would it be without the current open source projects out there WinZO, to me it seems you do not want to loose control of your work. You do not want someone fixing a bug without going through you first.  It seems OurMX has turned more into you making a name for your self again than for the community.

When and if this project is finally for the community again you can count me in to help but while its just your project no thanks. Closed source projects on a network that is dying just goes against the community. 

Edit:
"Everyone", don't you in fact mean you and Hollow who has been working alongside you for the last few years instead of assisting with OurMx when the call went out for more help ? Could that be the reason he doesn't have it either ?
I never asked for it nor would I have the time to do it the way you share code with a .zip file when or if it is ever open and for the community I will fix what I can when I can
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 21, 2015, 06:50:26 pm
Yup what a selfish guy I have been all of these years (ten at the last count) whilst only you can walk the streets with your head held high  :lol: :lol: :lol:


Getting back to the topic here : My PM box is still open to those who want to help both WinMX in general and the OurMx project specifically in deciding the way ahead given our current situation.

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 21, 2015, 06:58:01 pm
Btw Hollow if your going to re-enter the discussion regarding open src at least try to keep up with whats been said today, we all agree open src is the way ahead but not whilst OurMX has a damaging primary protocol built into it as standard, its frustrating for sure so the idea was to get around a table and work out a way ahead, this isn't about what you guys want and what lengths you wish to go to to get the src on github, it just wont happen if its a bad deal for the community and I feel it is at this time.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on June 21, 2015, 07:04:20 pm
Yup what a selfish guy I have been all of these years (ten at the last count) whilst only you can walk the streets with your head held high  :lol: :lol: :lol:

I am definitely not the only person on this network who can walk the streets with my head held high. I stand on the shoulder of giants when it comes to WinMX. Bender for example, he has given more to the network with his open source projects than anyone I can think of. And we have all benefited from his open work. I doubt OurMX would even exist if it wasn't for Benders open sourced RoboMX client.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on June 21, 2015, 07:05:22 pm
Btw Hollow if your going to re-enter the discussion regarding open src at least try to keep up with whats been said today, we all agree open src is the way ahead but not whilst OurMX has a damaging primary protocol built into it as standard, its frustrating for sure so the idea was to get around a table and work out a way ahead, this isn't about what you guys want and what lengths you wish to go to to get the src on github, it just wont happen if its a bad deal for the community and I feel it is at this time.

Well it took you four years to reach this point, I'm sure it wont take you four years to remove the Primary protocol and bundle it as a closed source resource. Once that's accomplished you can put it on github.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: hollow87 on June 21, 2015, 07:11:48 pm
Btw Hollow if your going to re-enter the discussion regarding open src at least try to keep up with whats been said today, we all agree open src is the way ahead but not whilst OurMX has a damaging primary protocol built into it as standard, its frustrating for sure so the idea was to get around a table and work out a way ahead this isn't about what you guys want and what lengths you wish to go to to get the src on github, it just wont happen if its a bad deal for the community and I feel it is at this time.

So Ghostship are you saying once you get the primary protocol separated from the rest of the code it would be on github/gitlab/bitbucket or are you going to do the archaic way of still passing around .zip files?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on June 21, 2015, 07:13:42 pm
If he goes with the zip method once any of us gets it we can just put it on github and get out of the dark ages anyway. But now I've said that we'll probably never get it lol
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on June 21, 2015, 07:25:57 pm
Quote from: ghostship
put potential tools of mass destruction into the hands of fools

if they wanted a specific DDoS tool those exist... as of now winmx -is- destroyed... no search no browse beyond 5000 files (design flaw) and no channel list.. have to go to joshs website for that....  and sit and watch peerblock sometime... winmx tries to connect to a little bit of everything... a primary connection barely keeps winmx glued together while carrying mostly superfluous traffic.....  ....its dead jim.... the opennap side of things isnt any better.. ppl are moving away from it and it has maybe 100 unique users total across all the servers...

Quote from: pri
Use a GPL license. No one will be able to distribute their changes without providing source. But at this point if you wait too long an open source client is going to happen and then all this current effort will be wasted.

winZO has a GPL licence and if you chant the right spell under a full moon it connects and.. huh.. the 'filter' on search allows one to see just the files they want... ...noone has done anything with winZO in quite some time either so it stands that source right there for the taking just isnt wanted by attackers since the attackers already have it figured out..... GS please... winmx is 1 and a half foot in the grave and its original source is most likely nowhere to be found even on a dusty harddrive... if you want it to live... in whatever form it takes... open source it... maybe ppl will come back with more than just kiddy porn (seriously have you seen what the wpn is serving up? im really serious here... its gross..)... if it dies out... well... then like opennap it will at least fade rather than go out in a fiery nosedive...
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 21, 2015, 07:35:05 pm
You don't seem to be listening do you Pri, let me spell this out simply so theres no confusion, you have sat back and made your server based solutions that centralise their activity and thus deliver control to you, I saw for myself last week in our chat room you discussing matters with a guy who was on a REN blocklist and you took him off it , is this the future your building in your RENMX empire ?

Centralisation in the short term has enabled you to keep your room safe and alive so nothings been said about the matters simply because folks can choose whether they want to join the REN gang or not but when it affects folks who have nothing to do with REN activities whats the solution if you yourself are not about to put matters right ?

You have benefitted directly from having a large room base with access to a third party server for its members that's your business but for me its not the way I see for the communities future as I wish to see a return to decentralised activity and I have headed my efforts towards such a future, I am aware of my limitations and the fact that I wont be alive forever to dish out reasonable and fair advice and thus open src is the way ahead to ensure that as long as someone cares to update the network it will always be one step ahead of its attackers, if you really want to reach the github stage then lets get discussing how we are to move past the current spate of weak protocol based attacks, if you could focus on that rather than this fixation with github then we may in the near future make amicable progress but hating on me and making personal attacks wont gain you any traction in fact its likely to lead to further issues as if I lose interest in this network I know of many others who will give up on it, why ? We have tried to keep this site and our efforts community based and folks have looked to us in times of need to pull rabbits out of the hat and in nearly all cases after some time we have delivered, this is done through gritted teeth and the hard work of many not by magic, decisions are never taken lightly and nor should they be, if we lose a focal point of the community we lose the folks focus and then we lose the folks, your wish to get your hands on OurMx is to be welcomed by myself but after the incident some years ago a question of trust issue has arisen that I cant overlook as it was never resolved to my satisfaction this then is why you and I are not on the best of terms it's not because I'm delusional or mad or just an old git its based on an actual event and thus logical trains of thought are in play here, following on from this logical train of thought it stands to reason we all need to discuss matters to reach a solution that benefits or satisfies us all as a community, when the time is right or we have an agreed solution to ensure OurMx is not a threat to the network everyone and his dad can have a portion of the cake but it really is foolhardy to be demanding at this time instead of discussing and negotiating to rebuild trust and good will as without such we are doomed to splinter into groups of no consequence.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on June 21, 2015, 07:52:43 pm
You don't seem to be listening do you Pri, let me spell this out simply so theres no confusion, you have sat back and made your server based solutions that centralise their activity and thus deliver control to you, I saw for myself last week in our chat room you discussing matters with a guy who was on a REN blocklist and you took him off it , is this the future your building in your RENMX empire ?


I host chat rooms from my server that also runs my Proxy Blocker API. The user you speak of is called Jerry and one of the hosts of the rooms I operate asked for him to be banned. I added his IP address to the firewall on the server not realising he was hosting rooms and using the Proxy Blocker service.

Now understand, it did not block his access to WinMX or anything like that, it just stopped him from being able to query the Proxy API. And when he informed me of my error I immediately removed his IP from the firewall and apologized to him. He is now able to use the Proxy Blocker API.

What I don't do however is put users IP's in the Proxy Blocker so that they get banned from all of WinMX like you did with Joshes IP. You opened the door to this discussion so don't start complaining I'm bringing this up.


Centralisation in the short term has enabled you to keep your room safe and alive so nothings been said about the matters simply because folks can choose whether they want to join the REN gang or not but when it affects folks who have nothing to do with REN activities whats the solution if you yourself are not about to put matters right ?

The client tools I make available, both a website php script and a metis plugins are open source. And the code is in no way obfuscated. People are free to modify the clients to point to any API they want. There are alternatives out there so people can use my same code to get proxy protection from other services. And there are people on WinMX who have also made their own API's that work with my client software.

When I finally go from this community people will be able to continue to use what I've made and modify them to work with other services. Some of which already exist.

You have benefitted directly from having a large room base with access to a third party server for its members that's your business but for me its not the way I see for the communities future as I wish to see a return to decentralised activity and I have headed my efforts towards such a future,

When I started the room was quite tiny. Only when it got to a moderate size did I start writing things for all of WinMX. Everything I've put out has been free and open with very liberal licenses. I don't consider my approach a centralised one.

It would be centralised if I was releasing stuff closed source and had them all hard coded to use my servers. That's just not the case. If anyone else wants to step up and release tools to "take control" away from me then be my guest, the more choice the community has the better for everybody.

I am aware of my limitations and the fact that I wont be alive forever to dish out reasonable and fair advice and thus open src is the way ahead to ensure that as long as someone cares to update the network it will always be one step ahead of its attackers, if you really want to reach the github stage then lets get discussing how we are to move past the current spate of weak protocol based attacks, if you could focus on that rather than this fixation with github then we may in the near future make amicable progress but hating on me and making personal attacks wont gain you any traction in fact its likely to lead to further issues as if I lose interest in this network I know of many others who will give up on it, why ? We have tried to keep this site and our efforts community based and folks have looked to us in times of need to pull rabbits out of the hat and in nearly all cases after some time we have delivered, this is done through gritted teeth and the hard work of many not by magic, decisions are never taken lightly and nor should they be, if we lose a focal point of the community we lose the folks focus and then we lose the folks, your wish to get your hands on OurMx is to be welcomed by myself but after the incident some years ago a question of trust issue has arisen that I cant overlook as it was never resolved to my satisfaction this then is why you and I are not on the best of terms it's not because I'm delusional or mad or just an old git its based on an actual event and thus logical trains of thought are in play here, following on from this logical train of thought it stands to reason we all need to discuss matters to reach a solution that benefits or satisfies us all as a community, when the time is right or we have an agreed solution to ensure OurMx is not a threat to the network everyone and his dad can have a portion of the cake but it really is foolhardy to be demanding at this time instead of discussing and negotiating to rebuild trust and good will as without such we are doomed to splinter into groups of no consequence.

I don't think we could ever work together, I think you're too afraid that I will just steal what you've made so far and release a RenMX client with it as a base. All I can say about that is I have zero interest in having a RenMX branded client. I don't need that kinda ego boost. All I want is a client we can update ourselves. That is why RCS is being made. We started off modifying WCS but realised we would have to remake the whole thing because it doesn't have any kind of virtual room support, it's not events driven etc and these were features we need to mitigate attacks.

If OurMX is based off old technology like MFC then that issue we had with WCS may be true with OurMX as-well and in which case it's probably not even worth pursuing. I'm now thinking perhaps we make a new OurMX on Github and get everyone on board to start over from scratch in a modern language and structure.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on June 21, 2015, 07:54:02 pm
Quote
your server based solutions

noone would be able to find their rooms if the server wasnt listing them.... ....just pointing that out....
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 21, 2015, 08:03:58 pm
Quite so Stripes but we have all heard the malicious rumours that go around that suggest the attacks are designed to ensure this exact situation, I have even had to defend Josh myself whilst wondering just why his server scans the network a lot more frequently that necessary to facilitate a simple room list, we will never know why that is unfortunately.

Talking about Josh, Josh admitted himself that he was aware the early attacks where being carried out by KM and he only came to search me out when KM got nasty and started spoofing Joshs IP in the attacks and for this reason to ensure we could rule Josh firmly out of such attacks I asked for his IP to be added to the blocklist and I spoke to him directly to let him know what had happened and lo and behold this then paints the story in another more fair and even handed light.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on June 21, 2015, 08:06:38 pm
That always happens, you make a solution to something on here and everyone says it's the solution provider behind the attacks. Like a firefighter who goes around starting their own fires.

We have zero interest in it. I would prefer the attacks ceased so we could find new users who load the channel list. Right now we don't get any new people just regulars and old timers who have come back after years away. It's a really sad situation and we're increasingly desperate for a solution.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on June 21, 2015, 08:10:20 pm
Also the reason that it asks for rooms more often than usual (below 30 minutes) is because when you send out a request for rooms you only get 5-10 back. You have to do it lots of times to get a full list of all the channels. That's just common sense.

Once the roomlist has rooms it only pings them with a single packet once every 30 minutes to make sure they're still turned on.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 21, 2015, 08:12:13 pm
I share your disappointment Pri make no mistake I have been hit firmly in the N*ts by these attacks but what choice do we have to move ahead when the networks main client is crippled and the main protocols we all rely on are compromised, you know the answers to these questions, perhaps a new third party client will the best idea but it will still need an improved primary protocol and at this time that's what I'm standing in the wind over.

If we can reach an open specification of sorts like they did with napster we can all build whatever we like and rest easy that its all going to work together, thats my initial goal at this time.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on June 21, 2015, 08:24:42 pm
I think you should spend the rest of your time at this point moving the primary parts of the client out into a library that can be bundled with the source code and then open it. I honestly believe that's the best course of action you can take to get the client finished.

In the near future we will need to have a discussion about an open protocol / protocol extensions with all the programmers together. That's going to be a tough conversation, I feel a bit bitter about some of the things that have been said here today so I'll leave the thread now for others to discuss that with you.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: hollow87 on June 21, 2015, 09:19:12 pm
I agree with Pri about getting the primary code separated from the rest of the code as that would be the basis of the requirement before you can start designing the new protocol.
 
I also agree attacking the problem of making a new primary protocol foolhardy will be bad in the end again.

So let me ask the good questions then, what are the requirements of the new protocol design?

Backwards compatibility?
How decentralized does it need to be?
Security?
Encryption what kind?
How about anonymity?
Again backwards compatibility? (Very important as it forms the basis of the other discussions)

It would be a long and lengthy discussion and which could end up pointless if you cant get the protocols separated properly.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 21, 2015, 09:58:16 pm
For the time being I suggest we leave the secondary client protocols as they are this allows for backwards compatibility with all known clients, for the file transfers we need to add an encryptive shell to protect folks privacy and disrupt some methods of throttling based on detection of the GET command.

Now to the meat and bones of the problem, our primary network : We have double handshaking between clients initially and that's great but the weakness appears in the subsequent primary peer to peer management,  a method has to be employed to prevent spoof or replay traffic from being deployed on this level of the network, if we can figure out either an improved usage of the current protocol or add a new feature or more possibly a new cryptographic mechanism to address this goal we have regained the network back, its that simple. whats not simple is how we achieve this in concept and code, that is the area of problem and thus the key area to address primarily.

On the second battle front I would also like to look at methods to prevent room spamming such as an automated captcha system so bots are not able to gain access trivially to annoy folks, this can doubtless be a reworked pm packet with a message or something of a more novel approach for our chat network  a small image file transfer appearing in a dlg box to ensure it cant be automatically bypassed, this i believe will address the problem and can be made seamless to normal chat based operations.

We all agree a backup chat listing server is a great method to bypass underhanded attacks on this community so perhaps we can have more of these or an update to the caches generated so the list can be gathered from there if somehow the an attacker is able to find a new exploit to hit on the chat list, the aim however is to face the problems head on in the first instance and mitigate the attacks in the second.

These are the areas I am looking at and would welcome some input on.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on June 21, 2015, 10:34:10 pm
Quote
I suggest we leave the secondary client protocols as they are this allows for backwards compatibility with all known clients, for the file transfers we need to add an encryptive shell to protect folks privacy and disrupt some methods of throttling based on detection of the GET command.

thats technically contradictory you cant have backwards compatibility to secondaries and change the file transfer method....
...and the file transfer does need some serious changes and verification.... i dunno if its me but ive been through 2 isps with winmx and i cannot get a file over 50mb to transfer completely unharmed.... videos get stuck with 'file mismatch' or actually transfer but have glitches.... audio files esp albumwrapped (over 50mb again) mp3s make the most horrid noises.... can download it again but i get a chance to either get it right or get an error in a different spot....

.rar and .zip are currently the only formats that make it through since they will give a CRC error if they break... prompting to try the download again..... its horribly annoying...


only thing backwards compatible should be chat and even then since we apparently now have a server on github (w00t!) a change in the way channels are listed is drastically needed.... everything else could be completely new just as long as it brings the old group over to the new.... which all thats needed is to bring the old chat into the new core...
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 21, 2015, 10:44:59 pm
I dont see such a contradiction, older clients will still be able to connect to the network at a secondary level but newer ones will use the newer file transfer system, those wishing to use older clients wont have 100% filesharing compatibility but thats not the aim is it, the aim is a general upgrade while supporting connectivity for the masses whilst such work is undertaken.

Seems all too simple and plain to me.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on June 21, 2015, 10:50:22 pm
at some point the legacy closed source stuff is going to need to be shed from the network....
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 21, 2015, 10:56:09 pm
Indeed, but the idea is to do so whilst minimising any disruption and to keep those parts of the system that are both hallmarks of the WPN and are safe to hold on to.

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on June 21, 2015, 11:05:38 pm
*runs winmx .... watches as its capable of nothing on its own*  --- those parts are going to be very few...
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 21, 2015, 11:13:37 pm
Are you making some kind of erroneous observation here Stripes ?

Once the false traffic is removed from the network many of the issues you complain of are non-existent , it feels as if your preparing the ground for others to suggest we all move to gnutella or some such other network , thats not on my agenda just so your aware.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on June 21, 2015, 11:26:12 pm
sure it works if its not attacked... so does windows 95.. surfs the net just fine... microsoft has the source to win95 tho and its been reincarnated many times.... the source of winmx is not there to be fixed against attacks, updated to use unicode... etc....

the east apparently focuses on files... im guessing with a site that trades in hashes... the west on chat... a 'half and half' client... part winmx part gnutella or even a whole new protocol would be the transition... keep the chat you keep the ppl.. the rest can basically be tossed out the window and replaced with something already open source and proven to work...

its been 4 years!! its time to do -something- instead of just sitting on an alpha build clone... trust has long been thrown out the window and using winmx is an absolute pain.... its really time to shit or get off the pot...

and honestly? the best way to use winmx is to remove or rename the patch file so it doesnt connect to the wpn... still get the chat from josh/pris site (whoever owns/runs winmxunlimited) and share over opennap... it really does work better like that...... problem is opennap is drying up...


and the 3000/5000 file limit browse? i would need 4 clients running side by side to share what i have in my library on the wpn...
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 21, 2015, 11:36:48 pm
I cannot afford to be distracted from the core topic so trivially Stripes I am here soley to discuss the way ahead and how we are going to reach that place, I know its been hard on all of the users but its also been a weight on my own shoulders of tremendous proportions, thus for now I choose not to become embroiled in doom and gloom but I do understand why you have reached this stage its a place many have hit way earlier than yourself.

There will be plenty of time for recriminations when we fail trying rather than giving up before our human resources are fully expended.

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on June 21, 2015, 11:47:25 pm
ok.. way ahead? split the primary out of the alpha client and put the rest on github so others can fix its many ui glitches and other hiccups... after that re-glue the primary in... ...you have spoken about doing such before this thread so... throw us a bone here... ...hopefully soon...
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 22, 2015, 12:22:01 am
 :lol:  It seems I am standing alone in thinking ahead, we will still be in the same boat even with a secondary client something we had back in 2011,  the only difference is that some will be able to make a secondary client besides the developers of it, what we need it a new architectural model for primary, why must so much effort be put into fighting about github and zero effort into resolving the real problem that afflicts us.

/me walks off in bewilderment
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on June 22, 2015, 01:22:31 am
github, sourceforge, google code... i dont care.... it needs to be out there where ppl can get to it... and if the primary protocol is so broken that it cant be trusted like that then it just needs to be replaced in its entirety... is it documented somewhere with the trouble spots pointed out? i still have that .zip from the leak with all the code in it but the docs cover the library and config files not the protocol...


you need to trust someone that can code... and to do that you need to put whats coded and documented out there to be worked on... but you say trust is a problem since they would be able to take down the network or use it for bad..... thing is... its already being used for bad... and slowly bleeding users... wait too long for that trust to come along and nothing will be left... ....need to take a risk that the network will actually be worked on and not abused (any more than it is)... if you cant take that risk then there is no 'network' anymore.... just a partially obscured abandonware app that will go nowhere....

you dont want it to collapse i know... but if it does then that was its fate due to too many bad users compared to good...
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on June 22, 2015, 01:32:47 am
just for shits and giggles heres a screeny of the opennap servers from 'pauls public' (most recent) that still work... note the 'populations' ... and it only takes a few searches to figure out that most of those users are doing what im doing and connecting to multiple naps... meaning theres about 150 users total... ...whats the headcount on the 'undocumented' wpn?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 22, 2015, 06:17:46 am
We are able to get a rough headcount of users due to the patch update bar being in operation however its not ever wise to broadcast the number unless its of a decent size as that may embolden the enemy to try harder or redouble their efforts if an end seemed in sight, that is why its not published.

I have documented the entire Protocol set and also I have written up various potential solutions that involve addressing the primary weakness directly, after a lot of reading it seemed to me that the problem is that we are missing vital components from the TCP network header, to strengthen this we need to add both a UTC and full date component, this can then be hashed (diffie hellman/merkle) with the rest of the header and the hash sent out, this simple mechanism allows for the network header to be in effect digitally signed and thus verifiable, doctored packets will of course be dumped and due to the time date addition we can ensure old packets are not replayed back into the network.

Why are we not using this already ?

I am not always confident in my own logical abilities and this seemed perhaps too good to be true thus I have kept it to myself but documented it also under the heading of improved network headerr concept in case i was ever run over by a truck, now we have little to lose it seems like we can maybe look seriously at this concept and how we can implement it the problem is as you have stated Stripes its not been possible to show the material to anyone because that means giving someone ultra fine details of the existing network header that i have always kept to myself , a working knowledge of the header can as you know allow for all sort of problems and yes I didn't want any general collapse on my watch.

The utc offset can be delivered to the user as they join the network at the cache level thus ensuring the whole network can stay in lockstep.

Anyone with a powerful mind have the time to investigate this concept ?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on June 22, 2015, 08:55:34 am
Quote
not ever wise to broadcast the number unless its of a decent size
i might be reading in-between the lines wrong but that feels like its not that great a number....

Quote
missing vital components from the TCP network header, to strengthen this we need to add both a UTC and full date component
(emphasis mine)

good idea ... slightly bad idea... reason; not all computer clocks are 'right' .... even the ones synced with NTP or synced to a virtual clock at start... clocks drift (which is why NTP is consistently tho very intermittently correcting the computer)... beware the resolution of time you use... 

(fun/stupid trivia? the system clock onboard most unmanned spacecraft is timed to the received data rate so sent data is in sync... farther the craft the slower the clock due to the speed limit of light...)

Quote
doctored packets will of course be dumped

how will doctored packets with correct time-hash be filtered out? --- granted they or any other packet wont (shouldnt) repeat but doctored 'correct' packets could be rapid-fired at the network....


Quote
its not been possible to show the material to anyone because that means giving someone ultra fine details of the existing network header that i have always kept to myself ,

so you have the entire roadmap but cant trust anyone to drive... ...concepts aside... how long is that going to last? will the wpn be here in another 4 years? you found one programmer who created an unstable base to build on then vanished in these 4 years....


interesting concept you have tho... ...if someone can glue it into the current patch that would be really nice...
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Bluehaze on June 22, 2015, 02:42:46 pm
There may be many possibilities for the Community. It is unmistakeably clear to anyone, regardless of their level of technical savvy, that the current WPN is terribly broken. Perhaps while things like the primary protocol and other issues are being solved, someone could set us up even temporarily on a simple 3-part network, like Zenar suggested in this old thread?
http://forum.winmxworld.com/index.php/topic,12160.0.html

This is a little more centralized, and maybe we could get a reprieve from the WPN's tormenters? This model would provide filesharing and chat, while features could be added? I apologize as I have no technical skills, but I even wonder if perhaps much of the existing code could be imported to such a simplified project.

I know we won't settle for anything less than what we have already got, but please consider, what do we have? I hope we will not leave the possible at the mercy of what we cannot yet arrange.

This is just a recurring thought...No one should get "beat up" over the new client project.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: hollow87 on June 22, 2015, 03:21:22 pm
I have a few things to say since this discussion is all about GhostShip telling people what to do and nothing about taking advice from the community

I cannot afford to be distracted from the core topic so trivially Stripes I am here soley to discuss the way ahead and how we are going to reach that place, I know its been hard on all of the users but its also been a weight on my own shoulders of tremendous proportions, thus for now I choose not to become embroiled in doom and gloom but I do understand why you have reached this stage its a place many have hit way earlier than yourself.

There will be plenty of time for recriminations when we fail trying rather than giving up before our human resources are fully expended.

Stripes was offering advice about how its not just the primary portion that needs redone to think about moving ahead its practically all of them.


I have documented the entire Protocol set and also I have written up various potential solutions that involve addressing the primary weakness directly, after a lot of reading it seemed to me that the problem is that we are missing vital components from the TCP network header, to strengthen this we need to add both a UTC and full date component, this can then be hashed (diffie hellman/merkle) with the rest of the header and the hash sent out, this simple mechanism allows for the network header to be in effect digitally signed and thus verifiable, doctored packets will of course be dumped and due to the time date addition we can ensure old packets are not replayed back into the network.

Diffie-Hellman-Merkle is not a hashing algorithm its a key exchange one.

Unless your thinking about an T-OTP type thing (time based one time password)

And no hashing with the UTC time stamp does not make it digitally singable as all they have to do it match what your doing and guess what its back to square one.

You want a digitally singable look at RCA, RCA also has an asymmetric encryption.

Want security? Get a new protocol, make it a bit more centralized. or harder to get onto the network for a client, malicious or not (by harder I mean computationally harder.  This is a essentially a Sybil attack on the network only a few ways to deal with that.

That's why more centralized versions work better than centralized they end up harder to attack with only trusting the central server(s) winmx has a trust everyone mentality, which as we seen is very insecure.

Moving forward need to design a trust no-one or partially trust this one etc.

But as I said without new protocol none of this would be a mentality and we would be back to trust everyone.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: hollow87 on June 22, 2015, 03:23:12 pm
Remove accidental double post
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Bluehaze on June 22, 2015, 03:48:36 pm
"The Sybil attack in computer security is an attack wherein a reputation system is subverted by forging identities in peer-to-peer networks. It is named after the subject of the book Sybil, a case study of a woman diagnosed with dissociative identity disorder." from wikipedia

It makes sense hoilow. Forging identities is so easy and the disruption so great because the attackers have great familiarity with the existing protocol. Completely new protocol ought to set the attackers back for awhile.

I hope we will think in terms of the possible, the doable.

The best to all of  you! :)
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: hollow87 on June 22, 2015, 05:41:38 pm
Not just a new protocol, it would have to be designed to help mitigate the Sybil attack.  That's why there are so many possible attacks against a decentralized network it's a matter of trust / security vs anonymity.  The more secure the network is the less anonymous it is and vice versa. Have to find a balance and figure out what your willing to give up for something else.

EDIT: phone auto corrected RSA  to RCA in my previous post
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 22, 2015, 05:51:15 pm
This much seems clear at this stage Hollow ,Pri and others who hide out of the way but are known to the community want to ditch all of the WPN protocol for something not as yet invented or functional in theory or practice but certainly it will be on "github"carrying the REN badge, this topic however isn't about a REN network client so if you really have nothing to add why are you so disruptive and negative about those trying to move this community ahead without making folks sign up to anyones central server or rules.

i believe in a decentralised network approach and no amount of time wasting from time wasters will change that view neither will personal attacks aimed at me achieve anything because frankly if you have nothing to say that's in any way balanced ,fair or informative I most likely wont be reading it bar the first few mantra words of " we don't like Ghostship", get over it and yourselves, this topic isn't about me baby sitting either of you its about a way ahead for this community as it is no one seems able to discuss the header with me because they seem to feel all of the current header fields are no longer there bar the additional ones I have suggested, what sort of foolishness is that ?

Perhaps the attacker has a magic wand that knows everyones client to client key pair as you seem to believe but i however don't , perhaps he is going to pre compute every possible search or room request before its sent and thus know the network id on each packet but of course we know that's not the case either in fact what I see here is just time wasting nonsense from those who have enjoyed a small measure of benefit from the attacks and strangely have had post attack relationships with the original attacker Michael Jones, Pri and Hollow are simply here to push their own weak agenda that's mainly hot air from what I can see, you guys have had 4 years to come up with something the same as the team here have, lets not brush that over,  is this REN idea all you can come up with in that time ?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on June 22, 2015, 05:59:14 pm
I think some of the mitigation techniques we could use would be first off all requests like channel lists, would require a handshake. That would stop the IP spoofing right off the bat. Then second to that we would add in flood controls so the same IP's can't keep requesting the same thing over and over while receiving replies from the network.

Then the searching system, at the moment a bad primary can be built to meddle with requests and to send out forged requests. I think probably the only way to fix this would be to add in a hashing system to requests as they leave clients which are computationally heavy to create and decrypt. The hashing system itself would also need its difficulty to scale as the years go by and processing power becomes higher. We're not talking several minutes to perform a single search just maybe 2-5 seconds on modern hardware. We could increase memory requirements and serial math operations to make it not work quickly on GPU's and have the strength automatically increase by year, we could also have clients not respond to highly hashed requests if the strength doesn't match the year, this would stop resource depletion attacks by the attacker sending hugely hashed searches to be decrypted.

This is a similar method used on some other decentralised systems and I think it could work well for us.

This much seems clear at this stage Hollow ,Pri and others who hide out of the way but are known to the community want to ditch all of the WPN protocol for something not as yet invented or functional in theory or practice but certainly it will be on "github"carrying the REN badge, this topic however isn't about a REN network client so if you really have nothing to add why are you so disruptive and negative about those trying to move this community ahead without making folks sign up to anyones central server or rules.

i believe in a decentralised network approach and no amount of time wasting from time wasters will change that view neither will personal attacks aimed at me achieve anything because frankly if you have nothing to say that's in any way balanced ,fair or informative I most likely wont be reading it bar the first few mantra words of " we don't like Ghostship", get over it and yourselves, this topic isn't about me baby sitting either of you its about a way ahead for this community as it is no one seems able to discuss the header with me because they seem to feel all of the current header fields are no longer there bar the additional ones I have suggested, what sort of foolishness is that ?

Perhaps the attacker has a magic wand that knows everyones client to client key pair as you seem to believe but i however don't , perhaps he is going to pre compute every possible search or room request before its sent and thus know the network id on each packet but of course we know that's not the case either in fact what I see here is just time wasting nonsense from those who have enjoyed a small measure of benefit from the attacks and strangely have had post attack relationships with the original attacker Michael Jones, Pri and Hollow are simply here to push their own weak agenda that's mainly hot air from what I can see, you guys have had 4 years to come up with something the same as the team here have, lets not brush that over,  is this REN idea all you can come up with in that time ?

So childish, get back on topic.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 22, 2015, 06:08:43 pm
/me pays attention  :nerd:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: hollow87 on June 22, 2015, 06:28:32 pm
Ghostship if your going to be so hostile to me when I'm trying to help and everyone else then screw it.

Don't try and start a discussion on getting the community involved when you clearly just want to do personal attacks questioning the community's agenda.

All I was trying to do was bring up valid points its a matter of security vs anonymity finding the balance.

You don't want a new protocol then its going to suffer just like the old.

Security through obscurity doesn't work. which is how WinMX is right now.  Your trying to base your "fixes" around the same.  What is preventing the attacker from using the same "UTC timestamp diffie-hellman hash" (again diffie-hellman is a key exchange not a hash) to carry out the same attacks.

Diffie-hellman key exchange is based on the idea of large random prime numbers  RSA asymmetric encryption based off their concept (except uses much larger numbers) 2048-bit and 4096-bit for RSA are common

I said nothing about making it centralized your just putting words in my mouth in a personal attack against me.  I brought up the fact that these attacks have to be dealt with and is a core problem in decentralized networks.  There are solutions which I gave an example of

Want security? Get a new protocol, make it a bit more centralized. or harder to get onto the network for a client, malicious or not (by harder I mean computationally harder.  This is a essentially a Sybil attack on the network only a few ways to deal with that.

That's why more centralized versions work better than centralized they end up harder to attack with only trusting the central server(s) winmx has a trust everyone mentality, which as we seen is very insecure.

Moving forward need to design a trust no-one or partially trust this one etc.

But as I said without new protocol none of this would be a mentality and we would be back to trust everyone.

or harder to get onto the network for a client, malicious or not
Moving forward need to design a trust no-one

That is how to make it harder for a single client to get a proper identity on a decentralized network
See how I had both solutions for a centralized AND a decentralized

Now if you wish to continue this discussion in a civil way I will if not I have better things to do than waste my time tolerating personal attacks when I'm trying to help the community.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 22, 2015, 06:32:01 pm
I agree I have said a lot and maybe annoyed a few of you but heres the deal I wont post as long as you guys continue the brainstorming unless you ask me to, what better deal can I offer, I asked for input and as long as its for the benefit of the community its the decent thing to listen to it.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: hollow87 on June 22, 2015, 06:49:09 pm
Still want your input
You say you don't want a centralized system but as it offers the best security why not use the centralized system we already have

Cache Servers

Put the burden of verifying trust on the cache servers themselves, primary's will look to the cache server to see if so and so can be trusted.
The cache servers can already know each other through DNS so a mini trust all p2p can be made between them.

Based on the rest of the community's input on this further expansion on exact details can be made
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 22, 2015, 06:59:08 pm
The reason for not centralising anything directly is simply the premise of falling foul of the napster/grokster legal minefield, atm most of us come here for the chat rooms etc and some still swap files, if we get involved in anyway directly with clients bar sending them off to do their own thing we could see a court order being issued as being "in charge" of the network or have a controlling method regarding what folks do on the network, this is an area of the law that has to be looked at carefully so we are always compliant with its terms, as long as we don't encourage folks to swap copyrighted material nor get involved in such we are all good to go but changes to this safe harbour model might not be so easy to achieve.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on June 22, 2015, 07:04:34 pm
What if we used the Tor network to use hidden services for it? There are libraries available to include Tor connectivity into the client and then we could make a new type of peer cache which operates behind hidden services, these can't be taken down and don't exit the tor network at any time.

That would provide anonymity and the ability to put many more peer caches. Of course I'm talking about under a future system where the peer caches would take on a few more roles as a central authority.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 22, 2015, 07:09:34 pm
Its a good idea but I cant officially comment on it as far as wmw is concerned, personally I think it might be useful for a p2p network but its that centralisation and reliance on a web server that to me seems a fat target for the Cartel to make false claims about.

You guys know a lot about DHT, what about looking at how we can use that to share information around the network without actually needing any third party support to enable or maintain it ?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: hollow87 on June 22, 2015, 07:18:42 pm
Yes the cache servers still would only send them on their way after they do a computational verification. NO transfers of files NO file listing or anything like that would be sent to the cache server only a heavier computational overhead of having a supernode connect to another supernode

For example an attacker can use the tcp's secondary connection to get supernodes to prevent that the handshake for a supernode to connect to another supernode must go through the cache server server all it would contain is a signing key, ip and port of x supernode or some sort of lookup table for that signing key and node cause right now a malicious supernode can just fake it way onto the network without the caches.   

And yes DHT still has issues of sybil attack that is what we are trying to prevent in first place got to have a chain of trust or heavy computational overhead to get an id on a network to mitigate sybil attack.

How to get the heavey computational overhead is the hard part.  One idea is to go up the chain to the root nodes. aka cache server that's what I'm trying to get to, but the way winmx is designed it doesn't follow a binary tree system. so trying to find a solution that doesn't totally change winmx while still getting the security.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: hollow87 on June 22, 2015, 07:21:37 pm
Idea is winmx is an unstructured p2p atm

Turning it into a semi structured one would allow us to mitigate a sybil attack with the ideas in this paper along with a few of our own
http://www.cse.psu.edu/~tfl12/paper/Sybil.pdf

And idea of unstructured vs structured p2p
https://www.usenix.org/legacy/event/usenix07/tech/full_papers/vishnumurthy/vishnumurthy.pdf

Edit: And the idea of a hidden tor service is it exists on the tor network where you have to be on the tor network to access it it is given an ID by the tor network to connect to.
Not a regular ip:port centralized thing.  It's kinda the same as the cache servers atm except their ip's and ports would not be known to regular clients only their tor id the .onion address
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on June 22, 2015, 07:22:52 pm
If we used DHT or a DHT-like custom thing we'd essentially be turning every node in the network into a peer cache and primary user combined. There would be some overhead there. We'd still need to build in some hashing system on top to slow down request abusers and we'd likely still need an authority of some type to bootstrap new connections that have never joined the network previously. Like a root DNS system in the world wide web to get other addresses from.

I think probably a combination approach, a central bootstrap as a hidden service or services. Combined with DHT for maintaining the network and then some kind of computational hashing system like SCRYPT. I mean the main thing we need to stop is people being able to just flood the network with junk requests that use up bandwidth and resources. So whatever we do it will require some kind of flood control, handshakes for UDP transfers of information (or just go TCP and get it for free) and some CPU heavy hashing system to slow down request forgers.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 22, 2015, 07:30:45 pm
In an ideal world the problem of relying on the caches for things would be a no brainer but we have both the legal and the other issues to contend with, say wmw set up such a scheme the mafia might claim that without us facilitating connections between clients who may have infringing files there would be no infringing activity, which in their fantasy world means no network, the further issue is one of who gets to run the caches etc we have seen battle after battle over such matters and whilst I like to think a fair and reasonable job has been done in selecting the trusted theres always someone who's going to claim bad will or malicious blocking of an individual, how do we work past that barrier when it requires more trust than many of the users are willing to hand over to anyone ?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on June 22, 2015, 07:37:28 pm
One solution we could do is at first we use peer caches that we operate, and then after a few weeks when the community has 1,000 users (and we'd integrate the peer cache technology in to their clients) we could switch our peer caches off and instead distribute a file with the client which contains a snapshot of the network.

This way we can bootstrap new users getting in and we can periodically update the file that is distributed with the new client. Only one of the IP's in that file would need to work to get someone on the network though for security we'd probably set it much higher so they would need to connect to a few and check if the nodes match on each etc
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 22, 2015, 07:43:43 pm
Hmm this idea is very similar to a feature we had decided to add at some stage to ourmx ,local peer caching to allow for connectivity in the event of some attack on the caches, such a localised cache could be added to periodically up to a set quantity by peer rating and then IP rotation, all sounds good to me.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on June 22, 2015, 08:12:13 pm
Quote
it will be on "github"carrying the REN badge,

gah... the 'ren' tag is for mxmoni .. thats all its for.... pri is playing with the two (last i looked there were two) minecraft servers hes running... 'renegades' is a room he inherited and scripted a bunch of toys and games for to keep things lively.... it could be served just as well on IRC...

and your github issues are getting old...
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 22, 2015, 08:29:49 pm
They are not particularly my issues though are they Stripes, I don't choose to have anything to do with github, I have made that plain and others seem to be taking issue with that choice.

Perhaps you may wish to start a Github arena for all of the remaining winmx communities open-src materials its up to you,  I have other matters to attend to however so I am exercising my choice currently not to do so, that's not always going to be the case but it is for the time being, these discussions being undertaken here will move us all in the right direction I believe and as one happy band, we don't have to act the same or even be the best of friends but I hope we all share the dream of a continuing network of friendship.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on June 22, 2015, 08:33:30 pm
ok.. calming down and reading -all- the recent posts.. we have some good ideas........ but i have the million dollar question of 'who is going to program this?' .. and better yet 'when?' .....
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: hollow87 on June 22, 2015, 08:34:22 pm
Agreed, again but without central authority/authorities issue of where trust is placed is back...so an idea maybe is trust is determined by X amount of existing nodes on network before your imputed into the routing table making that trust hard to get similar to mining a bitcoin maybe? so that is is very computational heavy making it pretty unfeasible for a bad node to poison the routing tables
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: hollow87 on June 22, 2015, 08:38:52 pm
And who is going to write this...first step i think would be to separate the code base so the insecure primary protocol cant be abused more and then after that point determine the correct path forward. github or not open source or not, need to get a proper separation of code in there so adapters can be made for the parts that need them and the hardwork of actually implementing these ideas begin.

So basically need a list of developers who know the language OurMX is in last I remember its C++/MFC

I know C++ can't say I know MFC but I've used ATL before.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 22, 2015, 09:16:33 pm
The list of those whom know the language is pretty much a who's who of the community of old, Myself, Will, Zenar, Zhen Xlogic, Richy (partial knowledge), Sharky, KM, Bender, I'm sure theres more out there.

Do we have a critical mass of coders in any other language ? It might be possible using the knowledge gained in constructing OurMx to simply create an other language analogue as we already know what classes we need what routines are where,what they do and their basic parameters, given enough coders and access to the OurMx src as a reference that too could be an option, I have stated before that part of the Project was to generate a client template and this is still possible if we have enough coders of moderate ability able to transcribe the MFC C++ routines to winAPI based versions.

 I created this some time ago to deal with just this scenario  :)

http://www.winmxworld.com/tutorials/secondary_client_creation.html
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: hollow87 on June 22, 2015, 09:24:16 pm
Josh, Adrian, Sean, and myself know C# / .Net ( Don't know if Sean knows C# or just VB.net but they are essentially the same) Zenar did .net as well don't recall any of his programs being C++/MFC I know ZCS was .Net
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 22, 2015, 09:26:44 pm
Zenar programs in multiple languges  8)

Did any of you investigate the remains of MoonMx by sir moon ?

http://archive.winmxworld.com/MoonMX/beta/
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: hollow87 on June 22, 2015, 09:34:00 pm
I have not, iirc that was based on WinZO again .net

Seems like the more complete open source programs are RoboMX, WinZO, MoonMX

But, recreating what was done in OurMX again does seem counter productive for the OurMX program
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 22, 2015, 09:41:28 pm
I agree but i have taken whats been said on board also regarding the MFC roadblock to both new programming talent and deployment of non-ms platforms, whilst MFC is usually supported its via the usage of wine and not natively, if its possible to use C++ as the core language or if the Mono platform is working at last things can move on rapidly and leave greater scope for the future, OurMx has a lot of good stuff under the hood but at essence its a simple switched windows application and delivers the normal views we have come to know over the years using the simplicity afforded by the VS dlg creator.

As long as we know what we want and where I dont even see us having to do much in the way of planning.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on June 22, 2015, 10:23:14 pm
since the current generation only seems to know .NET (pity) heres a useful link;  http://www.mono-project.com/docs/gui/
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: hollow87 on June 22, 2015, 10:42:45 pm
Yes most of win forms can be used with out issue as long there is no p/invoke code being used (calling native api)
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on June 24, 2015, 11:09:53 pm
well this train of thought stopped abruptly... but if one cant see the tracks it makes sense why....
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: hollow87 on June 24, 2015, 11:41:58 pm
Well what I got from it is we have a few .NET open source printers and a few .NET developers and to put the 2 together
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on June 25, 2015, 02:47:05 am
i figured a plan would have been discussed.... perhaps not here but somewhere on this forum.... course it could be in an area i cant see..
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on June 25, 2015, 06:23:33 am
Your half right Stripes, Hollow and Pri are most likely doing the same as myself in looking at whats been said and looking at how things for each of us specifically can be moved forward, I have been looking at the base problem preventing open srcing OurMx as that seems to be part and parcel of fixing up the network in the fastest way with minimal changes, a completely new network design will take some time to flesh out in both theory and practice so it made sense logically to look at the broken parts only and fix those, that's what I have been looking at and discussing with the rest of the OurMx team over the last few days, we are positive we can achieve more in this way than rebuilding the whole network from scratch, also we decided to refocus our efforts towards a more streamlined way of bug fixing and bringing beta 2 to the table. Plans have been made and will no doubt bear fruit across the next few weeks.

It would be nice if we can hear any firm plans of Hollow and Pri as I'm sure some interested folks (myself amongst them) would like to hear which direction they are looking at and of course if its possible to assist them without sabotaging our own efforts we will be happy to do so  :) 
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Pri on June 25, 2015, 06:40:31 am
We don't have anything we want to announce right now, soon though.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Sharky on July 06, 2015, 08:13:39 pm
 :whistle:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on July 06, 2015, 08:48:11 pm
Nice to see you paying a visit Sharky  8)

I was recently looking for new ideas to add to the primary protocols to prevent network annoyances but so far the quantity of useful input is in the low to near non-existent level , anything you think might be of help , basically we are looking for an asymmetrical message validation system to put in place of the current "publicised" system, any ideas ?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Sharky on July 06, 2015, 10:38:11 pm
I really like the DHT idea Pri mentioned, although I look at how Tixati has implemented it, and as far as my user experience with it goes, it wasn't that great.

Maybe there's some other BT clients that have a better implementation, If so, I'd really like to try them.

I'm sure there's other more viable solutions, but off of the top of my head, I can't really think of any, since I'm so out of the loop I don't even know the scope of the attacks anymore, aside from fake Primary clients.

I know in the past few years I've been on and off with my availability to help you guys, but in any case, if you guys need some help here and there with the client, I'll make my Skype available upon request.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on July 06, 2015, 11:03:39 pm
Help is always wanted  :yes:

I have a bag of bugs to fix in the client but thats not really been the block in the road so to speak, we need to re-create the mx wheel and replace the broken areas within the primary protocol, anything else is going to be build upon this non-trivial foundation and thus now is the best time to get this fixed and decided upon as to delay further means we are going to be building on both sand and a lower userbase for each month we hold out doing so.

We simply need a new security architecture to replace the old one and to add some further cryptographic bells and whistles to prevent abuse from spreading across the whole network should one part of the security model fail.

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Bluey_412 on August 13, 2015, 09:12:39 pm
Wanders back in from the bush...

Sniffs around at some of the last 3 months mess, hmm, plenty of droppings, not much useful except that last page...

Sits and watches
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on August 13, 2015, 11:31:28 pm
LOL  :lol: :lol:

The gnomes are still at work mate, it is clear however that theres not going to be any community wide agreement on network protocol improvements, this is a shame but it was necessary to go through the effort to ask for ideas of usage.



 
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Sharky on August 29, 2015, 04:13:55 am
 :afro:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: LiveForeverNow on August 30, 2015, 12:13:33 pm
jeez at this rate it'll be 2025 and the thing will still be unreleased
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on August 30, 2015, 06:42:48 pm
Hmm it is most frustrating both for those on the development crew and those waiting for it, as always its simply down to time for coding, the research is already in hand for both WPN and Opennap and whilst its coming along nicely with many improvements over the beta 1 we previously  released its not up to the standard required to both prevent adding to our woes on the network and to satisfy all of the naysayers and doom merchants, beta 1 wasn't as good as it should have been that's for sure, but it was proof that we where not telling stories as some folks now silent claimed at the time.

As always theres room on the group for those who know there way around MFC c++ and are up for a challenge, the more hands means the faster time we can get something released, this has always been the case and opportunities and time have been lost because folks didn't want to help out in areas like network and protocol improvement research , planning and function design, publicity teams arranged for when the release is ready and other areas that have taken up the coders valuable time, we must all work together when necessary or we will simply reach the end of the road with a great client and no userbase left.

Rest assured effort goes on each weekend and on most weekedays to bring a further release to the folks, no one is slacking but its really not fair to ask evrything for so long from so few, have faith and be ready when we are.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: WhiteLightningX on September 01, 2015, 05:27:34 am
Well, quality is the most important factor here, not really the userbase. They'll be coming back when they find out. Me and a few others I know are always lurking back here every so often, checking in on the place.  :yes: And the rest of the "average" consumers will come back when people like us give the green light for them. Which is kinda like a ratio of 1:"a lot."  :D I've got a gut feeling that while it may take a while, it will be the most robust p2p client of all time. Big statement, I know, but it'll probably be just like when WinMX first came out, FREAKING AWESOME.  8) with the extra security features.

You know, why not just make it a "any file" sharing client? I think you could do that with the old version, but wasn't it a little complicated? I also think that it should have a completely anonymous/secure mode for the more paranoid, like a TOR/"insert crazy other protocol idea here." Granted, that would create a curtain for bad guys to hide behind too, but with all of the "elite spying" BS (which all us regular intelligent/conspiracy people already knew about) I feel it would help the good guys from evil entities too even if it was slow as "poop".  :yes: :alien:

lol (and help people who like to try things before the buy them because of ****** return policies!)  :lol: :whistle: ;)

Hell, while we're at it why not just decentralize the internet at the same time and implement a bitcoin type DNS that only allows the owner of the keys to change the site(and create new keys continuously to nullify the old ones being cracked), which could be distributed across multiple encrypted decentralized machines (like with MaidSafe), and have a rating system to allow for duplicate domain names. That way you can pick which one you want to go to in case of someone pretending to be the other, all of which could be controlled by free access routers, and just adjust the speeds per user or the number of users allowed to be connected. Say goodbye to ISP's and ICANN together! (and that bill!!) :yes: :thumbs: And instead of trying to stop fake duplicates, just allow them and let the users decide on who to connect to with a list perhaps.  :yes:

we may be creating an alternative timeline for the future here....for us and the internet....
sorry i've clearly been up too long... :nerd: :canadian:
gonna go back to shutting up and eating my GMO's even if all of those major historical events were false flags and inside jobs... :whistle:
 :crazy:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: WhiteLightningX on September 01, 2015, 05:34:49 am
Sorry, such a long post and I forgot to thank you all for all you do! Sheesh my manners!  :)
Take your time, we've all seen what rushed products look like and we don't want that... *cough* MICROSOFT!!! *cough*

writing this post from a trusty XP btw.  8) *sings* *Brown Chicken Brown Cow!* *sings*  :bow:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on September 01, 2015, 06:09:46 am
What you have described I believe already exists  :lol:

I was researching something the other day and was re-reading about perfect dark, winny, share as well as freenet, compared to how they deliver security we are in the stone age  :whistle:

For those are interested in assessing some of the more secure network architectures this page makes a good place to start with

http://anonymous-p2p.org/programs.html


I,ll get back to work now I have hopefully pointed some of you towards testing and researching all of those types of heavier security p2p apps, if anyone has time a report on what network is usable for a larger userbase (many secure networks suck at being usable) as well as what security features make that the case would be good reading for me at least.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: WhiteLightningX on September 01, 2015, 06:58:51 am
One of the few I hadn't seen yet was OFFSystem, which looks hilariously nice.  :lol: What a funny way to do it..
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: WhiteLightningX on September 01, 2015, 07:09:24 am
It would appear that OFFSystem's efficiency could be drastically increased if a said block was reused. I mean, if a source file that you were downloading had a reappearing block, and you had already downloaded this reappearing block, wouldn't every one of those bits instantly become "already downloaded?" Even if you had multiple files being downloaded simultaneously? This would further add to anonymity since that said block could be used for your other transfers and GREATLY reduce overhead and global traffic flow since the client would be doing roughly half the work of the transfer internally. UGH..  Nvm, that was at the bottom of the wiki.... LOL posting before I finished reading....*shoots face* :death:

But really how in the hell did I miss OFFSystem? Never even heard of the thing. :suspious:
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Ace on September 01, 2015, 11:17:58 am
mx used to have the dup name block it was in the first verstions
lol spent many anight trying a nick that was not allready taken :>
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on September 01, 2015, 04:59:00 pm
Opennap supports that with a server message , might it have been a pre decentralisation version your thinking of Ace ?

For the more recent users out there WinMX adds an extra 5 digits on the end of the username to avoid duplicate name collisions.

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Ace on September 02, 2015, 01:26:08 am
yea possable was when thay first versions come out when it was just open nap so yea could been pre decentralisation
version ,  wpn versions as you say " Adds extra 5 digits on the end of the username to avoid duplicate name collisions."


should made bit clearer in what i ment :>
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on September 02, 2015, 05:48:25 am
Quote
TOR/"insert crazy other protocol idea here."

i2p ... the 'crazy protocol idea' for p2p apps is already here called i2p and actually its not a bad idea...
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: TOAD on November 17, 2015, 08:30:20 pm
So how is this cough "new client" going?

It looks pretty dead to me.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on November 17, 2015, 09:17:53 pm
@TOAD its currently in an unstable alpha state but functions such as chat, search, channel list, and.. technically... transfers (multisource and 'load incomplete files' does not work)  IIRC it also does not allow secondary connections to prevent a potential bad experience for that secondary...
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: TOAD on November 17, 2015, 10:04:07 pm
So it's in the same state as 3 years ago.

Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on November 17, 2015, 10:11:59 pm
like to lend a hand to fix that?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on November 18, 2015, 12:36:29 am
At the current time I am still working on the OpenNap side of things and Will has been tinkering with other areas that are already in place to fix up some of the issues during the last year, we have both been hindered by lack of time due to increased real life work loads, however as your aware we did create some documentation and web pages to support others in building opennap compatible programs, this has after all always been part of what goes on here, its not just a case of turning out a few finished items and hoarding all the protocols and helpful tools and knowledge to ourselves, the project was directed at replacing the Winmx client in the long terms and to build up a developer community as we went along, that's been the goal and while we all agree its been a long and rough road we have been following the long term strategy as well as doing our best to bring an actual finished client to you all, that's not easy when theres so few able to work on the client and so few willing to learn how to help, does anyone really think theres a vast conspiracy at WMW to sit on our thumbs instead of pushing on towards what the community needs desperately ?

During the remaining time allocated to us this year I will be looking for a trusted volunteer to create a master list of items to complete and also discussing with others here to prioritize the jobs into some sort of most effective order, this hasn't been done much so far as there are still parts I want completed internally in the client and thus they have automatic priority but for the sake of transparency I am happy to get a list together so we can all count down the fixes and bug removals as well as the completed features to an end, this sounds to me the best way to prevent frustration from folks, and count me amongst those folks, we have all passed the half way mark in terms of network implosion and that's something I am sad about but have no real control over any of the attackers activities, I said aloud at the time that this would occur and I named the person responsible for unleashing the mindless attacks on our network, I will continue with others to try to pick up the pieces and work with those whom wish to bring something to the table, this is a community problem and we are putting in effort still but its not a problem we control and thus please bear that in mind before becoming angry, committed WinMX users will always achieve more working together.

 



Title: Re: New Client
Post by: TOAD on November 18, 2015, 07:39:49 pm
I sense apathy here.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on November 18, 2015, 10:16:02 pm
I sense trivial baiting.

Are we achieving anything with this exchange ?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: RebelMX on November 19, 2015, 08:38:49 am
GS, The primary UDP protocol, with this protocol there appears to be no keep alive packet like the TCP one, what time limits have you imposed for a dropped primary - or have you linked the TCP keep alive packet to the primary UDP socket timeout code?

Thanks,
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: TOAD on November 19, 2015, 12:21:58 pm
Ghostship, you would make a good politician.

If there is such a thing.  :)
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on November 19, 2015, 06:04:03 pm
Quote
Ghostship, you would make a good politician

I hope I am not seen as bad as those types of folks, they start out with enthusiasm and ideals but end up looking for new ways to cut the bottoms out of our pockets and trickle a lot of the revenue into their own, nothing of that sort goes on here but i do enjoy a fruitful discussion, we all gain from such exchanges, many WinMx users are skilled professionals in their real life trade and a lot started the trail of online learning by dealing with problems encountered whilst using this network, I myself have learned many new skills, knowledge shared is gold in the bank.

I will be replying to RebelMx In private message.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Plum on January 17, 2016, 06:33:20 am
Since you have said in the past the exploits are really on the primary portion maybe make a the code able to have a conditional compile and make it so you can remove/add the primary portion with a simple #define statement, or put the primary code in a dynamically linked library that only gets linked at run time with the said define statement, then put the code on GitHub just as the secondary client only no primary code.

Can even put the full code base in a PRIVATE GitRepo either on GitHub or GitLab or BitBucket or somewhere else, that way you don't have to keep just zipping up the code and passing it around among who ever is currently developing it.

Another thing would be that if you have used any GPL code in your code (RoboMX is GPL) already you must follow the instructions of the GPL which includes licensing the deriviitve work under a license compatible with GPL and releasing the source.

That is the reason why Bender made his code GPL other people who used his work for future projects would have release their code as open source as well

Also the point of GitHub would be the code would be out there for people who are willing to commit not all their times but just small portions of if here and there to developing it.  You would even have a proper issue/bug tracker rather than using a SMF forum as a bug tracker.

At the moment I do not have a butt load of time to devote to this project however I would be willing to take a peek now and then at an issue tracker and the code to see if can't knock down 1 bug.  But the current way you guys share the code between one another does not work in a decentralized environment. 

Do the right thing release at least the secondary code on GitHub in a public repo if you need a private repo and don't want to pay the low fee GitHub charges for one I can offer a couple alternatives including BitBucket and GitLab (haven't tried GitLab yet but it looks very promising may start moving my private repo's there) then it can finally be called OurMX and actually mean it right now it's more like YourMX with how closed it is after promises of open source.

There is a GPL loophole. You can also have a private negotiation with the other projects and get specific permissions to use outside of the GPL scope from them. So a team could sell the rights to a specific version of their GPL code to someone, if they wanted to, with no support given, and no option to use any newer code from them. GPL and the like exist as automatic permission. If you want to use it outside the scope of the license, then you'd have to see if the authors want to give you a private license, and in a way that doesn't weaken nor compete with the GPL license.

And none of this is to be construed as legal advice, nor is anything stated guaranteed to be correct nor fit.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Plum on January 17, 2016, 07:27:23 am
Another solution is the "blob" approach. It is frowned upon in the open source community, but it is permissible. Now, what would be good would be to put the primary experiments in separate .DLL files and have the main code to check for them and only use their features if they exist -- assuming this is possible in Windows. Back to the GPL thing, you only have to open source what utilizes other open source code. So you can open the majority of the project with something that is usable, but keep additional or proprietary functionality in .DLL "blobs."

Off-topic, but I'm reminded of the Doom 3 controversy. Id software accidentally stepped on a patent. At the time, rather than challenge things, they coughed up royalties. Then when John Carmack (or was it John Romero?, both were a part of Id) decided to make the game engine open source (doesn't hurt revenue with games since the real value is in the logic, maps, graphics, and story line), he had to omit the code that appeared to be based on a patent. But he did rewrite that section from scratch to make it suitable for open source. It might not have been as optimized or robust, but it did work.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on January 17, 2016, 09:34:50 am
I can confirm no one i work with or myself or in fact anyone here is interested in proprietory versions or making money or anything of that ilk, this is about trying to use our combined brain power to find an "as-good-as-we-can-get " solution to the primary tcp network problem, i have had many concepts already thought up and some offer potential solutions but then we see not everyone wants to take up the ideas meaning we are going down a path of major incompatiblity and splintering of the community as a whole.

We need a great and secure network security model that can be open sourced and every developer we know of is happy to follow on and use in their own projects, this will means that we can all move ahead as a community and with minimal user disruption, thats the dream anyway, the secondary side of stuff can stay as it is in the meanwhile allowing for compatibility on at least one level with the older clients and associated userbase.

Thats the challenge then.



Btw Plum did you read this ?

http://forum.winmxworld.com/index.php/topic,13641.0.html

More minds on the job make for a faster solution  :yes:


Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Plum on January 17, 2016, 02:28:45 pm
Yes, I read the link hours before you posted that. I am a self-led person, and it is impossible for me to miss something that I might be interested in, since my approach to life is that of a self-led loner who always exhausts one's own resources before reaching out, so I'd be offended if you thought it was possible for me not to see that, that I had to be taught, babied, prompted, reminded, or anything else. I am a self-contained adult and need others to assume that about me, that I don't need them unless I somehow say I do. I might respond to that, but since it is being pushed onto me, I might not now. For me, things are always okay for me until others ruin it, force help on me, or presume to teach me anything. But I'm not as bad as Groucho Marx who said he'd never join any organization that would have him as a member. So a group that really wanted him quickly adopted an antisemitic policy (he was at least part Jewish of course), and he fought to get to be a member (like they wanted).

I never said anyone wanted to make money. I was suggesting the "proprietary" blob module concept. You can take advantage of distributing only binaries for the primary protocol while GPLing the rest. While it is frowned upon, it is legal and an accepted practice. The motives would be different. It isn't that you are protecting income, but protecting the concept. It is turning the commercial thing on its head, since they want to know the protocol to protect their bottom line. So it isn't protecting your bottom line, but protecting the users from other people's bottom line. So you can GPL most of it now except the protocol and rely on your own "blobs" for now, and then open them up when they are mature. So you harness the open source model while protecting the immature pieces.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: GhostShip on January 17, 2016, 04:43:30 pm
I understood your reasons for suggesting the release model you did, however I often get folks here who are pretty much impolite and paranoid whom have no trust and expect everyone to think and act as they do, now as much as I trust myself and most others trust me we still have to cater for such folks and their wishes, thus I cannot afford the continuing luxury of developing in secret if theres likely to be little if any of the community left to cater for in the longer run, I need more minds, free-thinkers and positive folks able to assist in rapidly creating a solid model that's acceptable to all and trusted by at the least the majority of the current userbase, this is the reason I pointed you to a specific topic as you clearly have something the community might benefit from, folks that don't want to assist are free not to, theres no one here bar me doing the asking so feel free to remain unpushed, independent and generally doing your own thing, I on the other hand would be remiss to ignore folks with helpful potential when I need such potential.
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: ale5000 on January 19, 2016, 03:29:19 am
What is happened to www.ourmxworld.com ?
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: silicon_toad2000 on January 19, 2016, 05:32:00 am
try .net
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: White Stripes on January 19, 2016, 06:53:02 am
off topic but site says "Unable to send e-mail. Contact the site administrator if the problem persists." .. apparently i registered there since it says my email is registered but i dunno what username or password i used O_o
Title: Re: New Client
Post by: Plum on January 20, 2016, 08:14:21 am
Thanks Ghostship. I should have seen that was why you invited me, but I still have a chip on my shoulder I'm still struggling to get past. I will check things out. I am not sure it is a commitment that I want. I am not a programmer, but have more of a solutions provider mentality. I've programmed in real mode using QB and assembly., but I don't know C, C++, how to write for protected mode, how to write for Windows, etc.