Author Topic: Still with the Standard-bearer, but with upgrading comes questions (Read 2491 times)

morpheous · « **on:** November 28, 2007, 06:23:49 pm »

Hey, Folks--unlike most of you, I'm still with good ole 2.6 (anyone remember the "frontcodes"?)--anyway, it was working fine until i "upgraded" from Dial-Up to DSL--ever since, i had to configure port forwarding, this & that--queues which used to be so simple "Remotely Queued 15" turned into "Remotely Queued 10016" (hunh?) and all sorts of stuff--the most obvious being erratic download speeeds--IF I can connect to download--can't seem to draw a correlation whether its DSL or Dial-up--some "Unknown"speeds give me very "decent" speeds (at least "double-digit kbps"), while I have had some DSL-ers who can't "crack" 5.00 kbps--what the heck is the problem? I can't believe just because I upgraded & had to configure port forwarding that everything went out of whack--but then stranger things have been known to happen. Let's toss this up & see if it "sticks"--what if I choose the "IP Passthru Option" (essentially opening all the ports)--would I not get some decent "connectivity (remember we're on 2.6 here--no "Primary/Secondary" connections)--and start seeing some decent d/l action? I'm open to suggestions--but only if it involves 2.6--not upgrading--been there--done that--terribly frustrating experiences abound--

Morpheous

Me Here · « **Reply #1 on:** December 03, 2007, 12:43:21 pm »

Morpheous this sounds like more of a ISP throttling then anything, however Im curious to know if the IP Passthrough had any affects on this problem..

Could you let us know

morpheous · « **Reply #2 on:** December 04, 2007, 07:59:24 pm »

I'm at a loss to explain this--only that in the last few days since my post , I have been dowloading at a considerably better rate--and at times, there IS a point where the "surfing" gets "sluggish" (it will take longer than it should--and not just ONE site but many, to surf)--which leads me to believe it COULD very well be an ISP thing. However, the one "constant" is the consistently LOW rates from the SAME users I d/l from (either they are DSL or "Unk" )--but their rates are like 2.00kbps --sometimes less--go figure!!

Morpheous

']['affy · « **Reply #3 on:** December 04, 2007, 08:23:14 pm »

could also be that the users have limited there upload speeds, alot of user show that there on 56k when infact there on a higher connection, its to try and fool probably trader into not downloading off them, alot of ppl do that nowadays

morpheous · « **Reply #4 on:** December 05, 2007, 02:43:42 am »

Regarding the "IP Passthru" option: it DID help--but essentially (as I was told by my IPS) I was leaving my computer "door" open for everyone & anyone (mal;icious spyware, etc) and wasn't real "comfortable" with that "option" (even though Windows Firewall was enabled & the Anti-virus, etc!
On the subject of d/l speeds, i'd have to agree with you, Taffy--although WHY someone would enter "Unk" puzzles me--if INDEED you're trying to DISSUADE d/lers

Morpheous

GhostShip · « **Reply #5 on:** December 06, 2007, 07:25:09 am »

Sorry to state some suff maybe obvious to you here Morpheus but I just wanted the newer winmx users to understand some important differences between the older versions of Mx such as the one under discussion and the later versions most are familiar with.

The 2.6 version is a much favoured opennap client and does not operate on the current WPN, its popularity in places like Japan due to unicode support ensures that it is still able to be found today on many of their fanbased support sites.

If you would like to try it out yourselves folks it can be found in the archive along with other older versions.

My thanks to the previous posters for their indulgance