|
|
Posted by George Hester on 10/12/05 03:16
"Don M." <newsreader@nospam4fineartsnospam.com> wrote in message
news:jMydnVn_auGC19HeRVnyiQ@giganews.com...
>
> "George Hester" wrote in message
news:IwV2f.40720$K91.31835@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> > "db" <@ .> wrote in message
news:434b10d3$0$6814$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net...
> > > "George Hester" wrote in message
news:_NA2f.37948$7b6.19207@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> > > > Getting connected correctly is the problem. These latest host files
and dll
> > > > fixes are sending us to fraudulent peer cache servers. When we get
> > > > connected and have no chat channels and cannot whois ourselves that
says the
> > > > host whereever that is we connected to is a fraud. And it is
harming the
> > > > Network.
> > > >
> > > > George Hester
> > >
> > > That sounds ridiculous to me, George. For a start there are only a
handful
> > > of cache servers operating and all of those are closely monitored by
people
> > > who have a relatively high, or high, level of understanding of the
WPNP.
> > > Anything obviously untoward should reveal itself quite quickly
particularly
> > > given the amount of focus at this moment in time.
> > >
> > > Once your WinMX client has gone "green" (connected) the operations of
your
> > > client have absolutely nothing to do with the cache servers at all;
your
> > > client simply connects to other peers running primary connections. If
you
> > > have problems, like an inability to list chat channels fully, or
inability
> > > to whois yourself, then that is purely down to an issue, or issues,
between
> > > your client and the remote primary client, or clients, that you're
trying to
> > > communicate with. It is highly likely to have nothing whatsoever to
do with
> > > cache servers.
> > >
> > > Are you using the DLL fix to get online, or a hosts file modification,
or
> > > both? The hosts file modification should have zero issue in respect
to your
> > > argument so long as you haven't messed it up in some way (like
removing the
> > > "127.0.0.1 localhost" line or something), though there's always the
> > > possibility that the DLL could have outstanding issues that may cause
> > > problems similar to what you're seeing. You have the power to run the
tests
> > > there to try and determine whether this might be the case, so do it,
and
> > > stop being so irresponsible by spreading bollocks around as if it's
the
> > > truth.
> > >
> > Sure no problem. All I want is a behaving client. I'm open to any and
all
> > ideas why it wouldn't. Just remember the truth is out there where to
find
> > it is the ticket.
> >
> ===========
>
> Having what it takes to get the ticket to where to find the truth seems to
be the real
> problem.
>
>
> Don
>
>
Something like hutzpah?
--
George Hester
_________________________________
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|