aMule Forum

English => Feature requests => Topic started by: troc on March 01, 2006, 06:51:32 PM

Title: protocol obfuscation
Post by: troc on March 01, 2006, 06:51:32 PM
Hello,

Any ideas on what kinda priority protocol obfuscation will have in amule's development ?

My isp will be introducing traffic shaping. I have just read (slyck.com) that encryption is being used in bt clients to mangle the the packets in such a way that they can't be classified by the ISP's hardware and given lower priority or bandwidth.

Keep up the great work.

Regards,
Troc.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: Kry on March 02, 2006, 12:50:55 AM
None
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: lfroen on March 02, 2006, 09:53:32 AM
Quote
My isp will be introducing traffic shaping.
Change ISP. Take legal action. This is not technical problem.
Title: reasonable?
Post by: bootstrap on March 02, 2006, 11:37:35 AM
And besides the questionable efforts to sabotage perfectly legal software and limit the users bandwith without paying money back, there is a technical reason that makes any attempt to do so pointless.

Whatever you do to obfuscate the protocol, you have to make sure your p2p partner understands your request or you could simply shut down amule. As long as other systems can contact yours (and since _all_ clients have to be compatible you can't do major changes anyway), your provider can create filters.

Cheers,
boot
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: Jonathan Métillon on September 26, 2006, 12:00:41 AM
Well you can say what you want I support troc feature request: my ISP (free.fr) is using Service Control (http://www.cisco.com/cdc_content_elements/flash/csc/cisco_FINAL_no-loop.html) from Cisco to spy and block P2P traffic and I use protocol obfuscation in eMule 0.47 with Windows XP... and it works! Otherwise I have a Low-ID or I can't connect at all.

Protocol obfuscation in aMule please!
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: Kry on September 26, 2006, 01:08:57 AM
Thre will be, but right now we all have Real Life stuff and work to do.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: Jonathan Métillon on September 26, 2006, 02:07:23 PM
What's that?
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: Kamen on September 28, 2006, 06:00:15 PM
That's sad. I've only started using aMule a few months ago. Guess I have to go back to eMule on Windoze from now on, seeing as it's the only mule that is of any use on my bandwidth-throttling ISP. The sad thing is I can't just switch ISP as it's the only ADSL provider in the whole country. You fellas in the free country sure got it good.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: wuischke on September 28, 2006, 06:24:54 PM
You could run eMule 0.47c on Linux using wine as well until aMule supports protocol obfusication.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: abubin on October 04, 2006, 08:17:28 AM
Quote
Originally posted by wuischke
You could run eMule 0.47c on Linux using wine as well until aMule supports protocol obfusication.

eMule with wine will be "messy" on a linux machine that is running purely as a backend server. Moreover, most people are running using old machines like me which is PII and running linux is not a problem.

Such server which is turned on 24/7 would consume a lot less power to save on electricity and low maintenance.

So, aMule daemon is still the way to go for me. Hopefully the obfuscation protocol will be implemented soon. Not trying to be pushy here but for people like us who is stuck with 1 ISP, it's really no looking good.

Keep up the good work of developing aMule.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: xupetas on October 04, 2006, 11:52:38 AM
Damn... i've been a amule zeallot for a number of years now, and im getting bounced from some servers just because i dont have protocol ofuscation.
Can you step up this PLEASE?
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: Kry on October 04, 2006, 12:52:00 PM
Soon.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: patrick_g on October 05, 2006, 08:20:21 PM
Hi,

when i search with amule (2.1.0 version in Ubuntu Dapper) i can see this sort of response for servers so i think protocole obfuscation will be mandatory in the not too distant future :

(http://static.flickr.com/84/260752284_670bd423fe_o.png)
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: wuischke on October 06, 2006, 08:46:28 AM
That only happens sometimes using the donkey server and if they think you've a provider which filters ed2k-packages.  It's done in order to prevent sending packages over and over again which will always be filtered by the isp's routers.

Solution: Use another server or KAD.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: lfroen on October 24, 2006, 10:06:33 PM
I am checking eMule encryption code right now. Coding will be started really soon.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: Truzzone on October 24, 2006, 10:23:20 PM
Quote
Originally posted by lfroen
I am checking eMule encryption code right now. Coding will be started really soon.
Thanks for your patient and happy coding  :baby: !

Best regards,

Truzzone  :)
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: Jonathan Métillon on October 24, 2006, 10:53:12 PM
Fantastic lfroen!

Keep us informed :-)
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: Daliphant on October 25, 2006, 12:45:26 PM
Thx!!!!!

 :baby: :baby: :baby: :baby: :baby: :baby:
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: sovking on October 25, 2006, 10:03:36 PM
Thanks! It's sad, but today is impossible living without that!
Title: I am very sad
Post by: Sylvain on October 31, 2006, 01:54:23 AM
Now ten years that I only work with Linux. (Unix before).
One mounth back to windows.
Because there is no ofuscation.

Sylvain.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: xupetas on October 31, 2006, 10:59:12 AM
Quote
Originally posted by lfroen
I am checking eMule encryption code right now. Coding will be started really soon.

I only have this to say  :baby:
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: riri on October 31, 2006, 01:25:17 PM
Quote
Originally posted by lfroen
I am checking eMule encryption code right now. Coding will be started really soon.


Merci  :baby: :baby: :baby: :baby: :baby: :baby:
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: xupetas on November 07, 2006, 01:36:06 PM
Hello guys... any news?
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: phoenix on November 08, 2006, 02:39:05 PM
I think we may need to implement it ASAP. This is the result of a seach in a server:

ed2k://|file|PLEASE USE EMULE 0.47C AND ENABLE PROTOCOL OBFUSCATION TO GET RESULTS FROM THis server (xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx)|xxxxxxxxx|xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx|/
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: Kry on November 08, 2006, 07:59:13 PM
Go on then :P
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: lfroen on November 09, 2006, 09:06:41 AM
Quote
Originally posted by phoenix
I think we may need to implement it ASAP. This is the result of a seach in a server:

ed2k://|file|PLEASE USE EMULE 0.47C AND ENABLE PROTOCOL OBFUSCATION TO GET RESULTS FROM THis server (xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx)|xxxxxxxxx|xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx|/

Can you send me (in PM, mail or IRC) IP of this server. I will need it for testing. Thanx.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: wuischke on November 09, 2006, 03:50:12 PM
Donkey Server 1 - 62.241.53.2:4242, I guess (according to the end if the capital letters)
Title: Finally!!!
Post by: melendro on November 10, 2006, 01:17:42 PM
Finally I will be able to use amule again!

Maybe this battle (won by the eMule users) will teach the amule people managing what to be implemented that the users requests should be taken more into account.

I don't want to be very rude, because I love your work and I thank you very much for it, but some statements like "but something like that (protocol obfuscation) will not be implemented in amule" (in the sticker "Features NOT to request") should never had been done.

Anyway, as we say in Spanish "mas vale tarde que nunca" (something like: better late than never).
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: leuk_he on November 10, 2006, 02:45:18 PM
I got the same message  yesterday using emule 0.47c Morph 9.2. So adding obfuscation is not a solution.

I think a server is broken.  If the message is correct and it really is from donkey server 2 (No way to verify that now teh ip is in the search result) ....

Adding and removing the DS1 & DS2 solved it for me. Restoring a backup of server.met did NOT reproduce it. I really hate this message because it suggest morph (or amule what you care about) is not good.
Title: RE: Finally!!!
Post by: ximebcn on November 11, 2006, 12:45:10 AM
I only want to say that we (users) MUST be patient with the amule developers.

They work for free doing an excellent job, maintaining an stable software.

I would like to see this kind of cooperation in any of the companies I worked.

If you don't like amule, simply change to other client. There are many others.

Nice job and thanks.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: ellocofray on November 11, 2006, 04:44:23 PM
If protocol ofuscation must wait some time, at least put a collumn in servers list describing if the server is running ofuscation.

Thanks.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: marcpalaus on November 12, 2006, 07:38:39 PM
Try by yourself.

The servers that i've seen using obfuscation are the Donkeyserver's #1, #2, etc...

but anyway, you still can connect to them, the only problem is that you cannot search. IF you wanna search, you can change the server for a moment...

I hope obfuscation will be implemented soon.... Because all the eMule 0.47c clients are forced to enable obfuscation, and we cannot connect to them, and we get less download rate than the official emule client.. :(
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: Kry on November 12, 2006, 07:50:15 PM
Enabling obfuscation on 0.47c does NOT reject non-obfuscated clients unless you specifically tell it to do so.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: marcpalaus on November 12, 2006, 07:52:20 PM
I know.

but when I went to my windows machine to use emule 0.47c to search, I couldn't search unless I enabled the option to only connect to obfuscated clients.... so I enabled it.

if you wanna try...
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: xupetas on November 12, 2006, 08:52:45 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Kry
Enabling obfuscation on 0.47c does NOT reject non-obfuscated clients unless you specifically tell it to do so.

The begging to wonder but it's possible that most of the users only accept obfuscated clients on these servers.
The Sources on them for me dropped very sigificaly
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: leuk_he on November 14, 2006, 01:56:42 PM
It is very well possible that users try to enable "only obfuscated(not recommended)".  Since obfuscation sometimes fails on Donkey server 1& 2 (because they are overloaded i guess) some users will try some other settings.
Title: any news about obfuscation development??
Post by: esplinter on November 17, 2006, 08:06:39 PM
hi all

is there any news about the state of the obfuscation development??

sorry for asking again, I dont wanna be boring asking and asking the same one more time but just wanna know something about it.....any release date??

sorry again for being so tedious, I suposse developers must be tired of answering always the same, but I havent used windows for many years and don´t wanna install windows on noany of my machines and cant live without edonkey network, my isp is blocking ed2k traffic and I think I will have to use a fucking win again  X(

thanks in advance for your answers and the great soft that you give us. keep on good work. I will wait patient.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: wuischke on November 17, 2006, 08:09:31 PM
In the meantime you can use eMule 0.47c with wine. It's not the best solution, but it works under Linux.
Title: I think I will have to use wine
Post by: esplinter on November 18, 2006, 09:57:12 PM
my server/firewall/p2p machine, which is 24/7 online,  has no X system so I cant use wine on it. also other times I have used wine with networking programs didnt work really well, but I think I will have to use wine on my desktop machine while I wait for any obfuscation implementation for linux.

thx for your help.
Title: RE: I think I will have to use wine
Post by: xupetas on November 20, 2006, 09:28:00 AM
Quote
Originally posted by esplinter
my server/firewall/p2p machine, which is 24/7 online,  has no X system so I cant use wine on it. also other times I have used wine with networking programs didnt work really well, but I think I will have to use wine on my desktop machine while I wait for any obfuscation implementation for linux.

thx for your help.


you can use Xvnc to rune wine without X.
But the best solution is really the new version of amule that kry has been promissing.  :]
Title: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: mikool19 on November 23, 2006, 07:21:13 PM
In France (i suppose elsewhere also...), you have 2 cases with DSL : ungrouped or not ungrouped.

For ungrouped, provider make generally no filtering on P2P, so no need obfuscation.

The problem is for those who are not ungrouped, the majority !
Majority of providers make P2P filtering with switch layer 3 as Cisco, but not only for applications like aMule but for all P2P traffic, like Skype and other internet game, it's a big problem.

The french historic provider (no publicity...) makes no filtering, ungrouped or not ungrouped, so it can be a solution for those who prefer change their ISP and keep their applications.

So, obfuscation should become a standard for all P2P application if ISP continue to fliter P2P packets.

I have made as others, i have installed eMule 0.47c on WinXP, waiting for an aMule with obfuscation, but for when ?

Thanks in advance for your work.
Title: Run eMule under VMware Player!
Post by: nubtumbler on November 25, 2006, 06:43:05 AM
Quote
Originally posted by wuischke
In the meantime you can use eMule 0.47c with wine. It's not the best solution, but it works under Linux.

There are serious stability problems with eMule under Wine.  It destroyed the majority of my met files on the first run.

There's a thread over at the eMule forums tracking the usage of eMule under Wine.  The consensus is that eMule + Wine is not anywhere near stable.

I have had excellent results running eMule with VMware.   VMWare player is free and the performance is great.   I'm running Windows 2000 (no service packs) on the virtual machine.

Here's roughly what to do:

1 Install VMware player.  Download from http://www.vmware.com/download/player/    Ubuntu users can: apt-get install vmware-player

2 Make a virtual machine.  Go here:  http://www.easyvmx.com  You want bridged networking and 96M or 128M of RAM.

3 Install a windows OS on the VM.

4 Share your aMule temp directory using Samba.

5 Install eMule and configure it.  Point eMule to your aMule temp directory over the network.

6 Don't forget to enable obfuscation!

This setup is extremely stable. It's also surprisingly light on CPU usage so long as you use Windows 2000 instead of XP and avoid installing service packs.  The only downside is the memory usage.

It's much better than aMule under Wine.  It sucks to have your downloads corrupted.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: wuischke on November 25, 2006, 11:08:06 AM
OK, this didn't happen to me, but your solution seems to work just fine. Thanks for the information.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: nubtumbler on November 25, 2006, 04:51:25 PM
Quote
Originally posted by wuischke
OK, this didn't happen to me, but your solution seems to work just fine. Thanks for the information.

I should have verified my information before I posted.  Someone has fixed the major bug that has plagued eMule under Wine.  According to the eMule Forum's Wine thread  (http://forum.emule-project.net/index.php?showtopic=42844&hl=wine&st=220) it has been fixed in Wine 9.25!

It is entirely possible that eMule runs well under the latest version of Wine.

I'd love to hear if anyone here is able to run eMule under Wine 9.25 in a stable way (for 2-3 weeks at a time without crash.)  I am still gunshy from my last eMule + Wine experience to try it so early.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: Typhon on November 25, 2006, 09:06:14 PM
Even if it runs OK, that would be only a temporary solution for me, since we have an ed2k client - aMule. It just needs to be fixed.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: nubtumbler on November 25, 2006, 09:57:15 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Typhon
Even if it runs OK, that would be only a temporary solution for me, since we have an ed2k client - aMule. It just needs to be fixed.

Obfuscation is a new feature, not a simple bugfix.  New code must be written or borrowed from eMule and then it must be tested.  It may be quite a while before obfuscation make it into a stable aMule release.  Then again, it could be next month.  Only the devs really know and I don't think they're talking on the matter.

Many people have been unable to run aMule for months already so it makes sense to find the best way to run eMule in the meantime.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: Typhon on November 26, 2006, 01:27:01 PM
Well, I tried to run eMule on Crossover Office emulator yesterday evening, alas without any success It didn't even start.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: bad-times on November 27, 2006, 01:11:50 PM
networking runs fine on wine now,
but other stuff is not so good.
it seems that everytime they fix something they break something else :(

a bit off topic, but the wine devs need to stop concentrating on fixing "solitair" and fussing over MSI installer & MS-office and make it work with app's we dont have *nix versions of.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: jps on November 28, 2006, 08:01:56 AM
Quote
Originally posted by nubtumbler
It is entirely possible that eMule runs well under the latest version of Wine.

I'd love to hear if anyone here is able to run eMule under Wine 9.25 in a stable way (for 2-3 weeks at a time without crash.)  I am still gunshy from my last eMule + Wine experience to try it so early.

Thanks very much for the tip. Wine 0.9.25 and eMule 0.47c with protocol obfuscation work fine since two days now without crash. Seems very stable with this new version of wine. With an Upload of 16ko/s, I have an average Download of 32ko/s with files sources between 2 and 50. Amule is unusable since 6 months with my isp.

Update: one week now without crash. Definitively stable. Best way waiting the developpers of amule implement protocol obfuscation, imho.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: mikool19 on November 30, 2006, 01:13:57 PM
For those who work on MacOSX, there is Parallels Desktop (free for 1 month in evaluation) which make the same thing as VMware.

I have tested Parallels Desktop 2.2 on an iMac Core 2 Duo (1 GO RAM) in OSX 10.4.8 with WinXP SP2 (500 Mo RAM allocated) and eMule 0.47c without any problem : it's stable and efficient.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: anonymous-Mule on December 03, 2006, 09:14:05 PM
is obfuscation in ? we should stay compatible with emule, especially if one of the further versions is delivered with connections to obfuscation only..
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: wuischke on December 03, 2006, 09:36:40 PM
Nah, it ain't implemented yet, but people are working on it. You know, will be implemented soon® and stuff.

In other words: There are efforts to implement this feature, but developers are busy (real life) and therefore the support is still missing.
Title: RE: Finally!!!
Post by: lulu135 on December 04, 2006, 12:21:33 AM
Quote
Originally posted by melendro
I don't want to be very rude, because I love your work and I thank you very much for it, but some statements like "but something like that (protocol obfuscation) will not be implemented in amule" (in the sticker "Features NOT to request") should never had been done.
I agree completely.  If the amule developers don't want to listen to users, that is of course their right since they work for free.  But I also don't think they would want to work on amule if nobody uses it (maybe Im wrong).  Now that eMule under wine works again I am happy and I will use that for a while, at least until this issue gets sorted out.

Sometimes I wish the amule developers had some innovation of their own and didn't just copy every feature from emule 1-2 years later.  (like Kad)

There are other examples of features that should not be in the "never" list like anonymization and webcache.  Saying "never" is just based on some personal opinions about what is "possible" or "legal".  OK, right now webcache is irrelevant and anonymization is inefficient, but network technology and laws change over time, and anyone (even the devs) might change their opinion in the future.

Anyway, it's good that protocol obfuscation is coming, even though its only because they were "forced" by emule and server operators.
Title: RE: Finally!!!
Post by: Kry on December 04, 2006, 12:40:36 AM
Quote
Originally posted by lulu135
Sometimes I wish the amule developers had some innovation of their own and didn't just copy every feature from emule 1-2 years later.  (like Kad)

[snip]

Anyway, it's good that protocol obfuscation is coming, even though its only because they were "forced" by emule and server operators.

I had a very offensive reply written, but I decided to edit it out and let you look like an idiot by yourself.

Damn, I did it again.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: Aethereal on December 04, 2006, 08:47:35 AM
As stated in several places, developers' aim in aMule project is to create the best client for the existing ed2k protocol.
So I am quite happy they don't introduce any "innovation" in how the protocol is handled, because that would mean creating a restricted alternate network of users of the new protocol. That's also why they don't include in the tree some "extreme" mods...
The fact that some servers decided to allow some functions (search) only to obfuscated clients, and that a lot of eMule users are activating their "obfuscate connections only" option is quite arbitrary and souldn't have happened.
The "don't ask" list is of course a right thing, in order to avoid a flood of unnecessary requests. As you see, when something is really needed, the devs take the necessary steps.
And, of course, aMule is full of innovations, only not in in the protocol section. Look at the daemon, the remote GUI and so on...
Title: RE: Finally!!!
Post by: Menion on December 04, 2006, 09:09:47 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Kry
Quote
Originally posted by lulu135
Sometimes I wish the amule developers had some innovation of their own and didn't just copy every feature from emule 1-2 years later.  (like Kad)

[snip]

Anyway, it's good that protocol obfuscation is coming, even though its only because they were "forced" by emule and server operators.

I had a very offensive reply written, but I decided to edit it out and let you look like an idiot by yourself.

Damn, I did it again.

Kry, you know, such people exist on every forum.... You must think that for each person like this, 100 will continue to use and love your work!!! Bye!!!
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: TASADAR-F on December 12, 2006, 06:14:29 PM
I use and love Kry's work  :baby:  :baby:  :baby:  :baby:  :baby:
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: xupetas on December 19, 2006, 06:14:56 PM
Dear Santa,

Can i have protocol obfuscation this Christmas??
I've really been a good boy... please?

 :))
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: wuischke on December 19, 2006, 10:04:54 PM
I'm not Santa, but: No, I doubt it.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: Op15L on January 02, 2007, 06:03:26 PM
what is the current status?
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: Kry on January 02, 2007, 06:36:04 PM
Working on it.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: dsafda on January 17, 2007, 11:20:07 AM
Great thanks, we need it...  8o


 :baby:
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: dsafda on January 24, 2007, 06:53:12 PM
Servers doesn't allow search function for us without obfuscation...  ;( :evil:
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: Truzzone on January 24, 2007, 07:52:01 PM
Change server, try DonkeyServer N 1 2 3   ;)

Best regards,

Truzzone  :)
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: KamiKazeNH on January 25, 2007, 02:15:33 AM
Hi!

Quote
Originally posted by Kry
Working on it.

Thanks a lot!

In Brazil (specifically BrasilTelecom Network) if you don't use obfuscation, your network traffic is dropped down above 1-2 hours.

And I haven't any other choice to change DSL provider for now.

Again, thanks for working on it  :baby: :baby: :baby: :baby: :baby:
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: dsafda on January 25, 2007, 09:02:04 PM
Network traffic is dropped even on Donkey2... you can search, but without obfuscation your ISP block your internet traffic...

So not a real solution...  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: dsky on January 27, 2007, 08:58:46 PM
how long have we to wait for?

just to know if i've to reinstall windows and emule in the while

thanks..
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: wuischke on January 27, 2007, 09:04:34 PM
Do you know wine? ;)

I don't know how long this will take, but I can ensure you, that the code is currently being implemented.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: dsky on January 28, 2007, 02:44:12 PM
Quote
Originally posted by wuischke
Do you know wine? ;)

I don't know how long this will take, but I can ensure you, that the code is currently being implemented.

but... days... weeks... months?
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: lucano66 on January 28, 2007, 04:56:45 PM
I hope day... :-)
A would say it if it is only day.

No, probably months... :-(
OK.

Thank you for your work and, even without the obfuscation, that make the software more and more obsolete, it is a great piece of code.

Really thank you.

(Pssss... Where I can find wine? :-) (It's a joke... we wait!)

P.S. Really, it can help if all the reader of this forum make a donation?
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: DoBs on January 28, 2007, 07:41:12 PM
Hello people

In italy now, from two day, i can't download and upload go down every ten minutes  ;(.

Thank's to all developer for the work we are doing, i wait it.  :baby:


Bye.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: rufus on January 29, 2007, 12:10:54 PM
Both Gnutella and plain eDonkey are flat dead. I can hardly find any peer up.
All the connected peers use emule *with protocol obfuscation enabled*; just
open the "clients" window on aMule, and see by yourself. This makes it
impossible to use the P2P network, and amule in particular, unless you have
a windows machine with obfuscation enabled eMule. The last release of
aMule dates back to June 2006, which smells like dead mule. Kry claims
to be working on it, but there is no sign of progress (the source does not
compile on my machine). There is also no sign of OSX clients for obfuscated
eDonkey. Overall, this makes a big RIP sign on P2P for OSX. Do you have
anything positive to say? I am feeling in low moods, and I need to cheer up.
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: wuischke on January 29, 2007, 01:51:30 PM
Quote
there is no sign of progress
Take a look at the sources and you'll see that there are many chances regarding Protocol Obfuscation.

Quote
The last release of aMule dates back to June 2006, which smells like dead mule.
Take a look ath the release dates here: eMule sf.net project (http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=53489&package_id=47913) or even worse aMule releases (http://www.amule.org/wiki/index.php/Releases)
I don't smell dead mule, I smell development of very complex applications by too few people.

Quote
I am feeling in low moods, and I need to cheer up.
Will a 'Protocol Obfuscation integration is under heavy constructions' do?
Title: Re: Protocol Obfuscation
Post by: rufus on January 29, 2007, 02:47:12 PM
> Will a 'Protocol Obfuscation integration is under heavy constructions' do?

... much better. Thank you!
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: Axl_Mas on February 21, 2007, 08:47:34 AM
It's only my impression or the last cvs has a working protocol obfuscation?
I don't see the option in the gui about that, but now i can enter in any server!
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: phoenix on February 21, 2007, 03:03:37 PM
Hi Axl_Mas,

I wish you were right, but no, we still have no working protocol obfuscation. Work is in progress, though.
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: Axl_Mas on February 21, 2007, 04:27:10 PM
Hi Axl_Mas,

I wish you were right, but no, we still have no working protocol obfuscation. Work is in progress, though.


Ok! :(
When it will be ready in cvs, can you annunce in main page?
TNX
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: phoenix on February 21, 2007, 06:12:15 PM
Of course! :D
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: KafesneBikaina on March 08, 2007, 04:11:10 PM
Can you say when could we have the protocol obfuscation in amule cvs?
days? weeks? months?

I hate my ISP but I can't change it!  >:(

Thanks for your work and patience.
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: Kry on March 08, 2007, 04:33:10 PM
Weeks.
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: KamiKazeNH on March 10, 2007, 09:02:49 PM
Hi!

Weeks.

Very good notice, Kry!
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: todzuallen on March 11, 2007, 06:59:47 PM
I hope this gets implimented soon I had to switch to running emule under wine.
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: Axl_Mas on March 12, 2007, 12:14:24 AM
Weeks.

Great news Kry!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thanks for the hard job!
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: Jonathan Métillon on March 17, 2007, 12:34:06 PM
Weeks.
OMG OMG OMG OMG come on guys I can't wait :-)
I'd love to remove NeoMule on Wine...
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: xushi on March 17, 2007, 04:16:06 PM
I really don't get it.. I've never gone through the problem where this obfuscation thing affects my downloads..

I mean, just keep the six DonkeyServers in your list and only those six. If you want to search for anything, connect to DS2 and search without any problems. Afterthat, leave it to auto-select any other server depending on your disconnections or load etc...

I still max out my connection on a daily basis with aMule alone, and I still can download / search for whatever i want.

I don't see the reason for switching to other apps through wine.

Edit, and this has been done in two different countries with two different ISPs in each, all of which traffic shape or have restrictions nowadays unfortunately...
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: skolnick on March 17, 2007, 10:14:35 PM
Hi xushi!

Protocol obfuscation is necessary for some people whose ISP filters based on traffic instead of ports (they block traffic, instead of just shape it) so some people need this badly. For me is also transparent if this is implemented or not, since aMule works fine for me, but if implemented, aMule will work better for many people.

Regards.
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: han0i on March 19, 2007, 01:10:22 AM
Weeks.

Thanks!!!!
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: todzuallen on April 15, 2007, 12:57:02 AM
it's nearing close to a month since the last post on this... I hope it's almost done :)
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: xupetas on April 16, 2007, 04:45:04 PM
I hoped for this on Christmas...
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: abubin on April 19, 2007, 07:12:06 PM
be a little more patient. We have been waiting for this for almost a year now. A few more months should be no problem. Knowing that the developer is doing it really helps. Keep up the good work amule developers.
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: Axl_Mas on May 17, 2007, 11:01:28 AM
Weeks.

How many others?
Do you think that the possible cvs relase can be relase before the summer holiday or after there?
Thanks for your hard work....i love aMule!!!
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: wuischke on May 17, 2007, 11:07:54 AM
Protocol obfuscation is intended to be finished in Mai.
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: Axl_Mas on May 17, 2007, 11:30:17 AM
Protocol obfuscation is intended to be finished in Mai.

GREAT!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: rafuean on May 17, 2007, 12:31:03 PM
Protocol obfuscation is intended to be finished in Mai.

GREAT!!!!!!!!!

don't be so happy, he didn't told the year xD
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: wuischke on May 17, 2007, 01:25:45 PM
Oh, you might be surprised to hear that aMule 2.1.3 isn't supposed to become one year as the latest stable release either.
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: todzuallen on June 01, 2007, 07:09:23 AM
This doesn't really matter so much anymore as my ISP rogers has started slowing down all encrypted traffic now.
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: bertoldic on June 07, 2007, 08:49:35 AM
A suggestion...

In Italy we have huge proplems with QoS policies and amule.Even other countries are moving towards these kind of policies.So no protocol obfuscation no amule.We can use emule also with wine if we use Linux.
I suggest you to develop this protocol if not users will not use amule.People are not interested in the slowest  p2p software...
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: wuischke on June 07, 2007, 11:15:31 AM
Geez. You did read some other posts of this topic, didn't you? Protocol Obfuscation is being implemented, there's no use in requesting it again and again.

The only reason why it isn't finished yet is the real life of developers. The responsible developer is currently on vacation.
I'm far from home surrounded by Windows computers, too, but if it makes you happy I can tell you that there has already been an encrypted file transfer between two aMule clients a day before I left.
Expect further development as of next week.

btw: I really don't like the way you write.
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: KafesneBikaina on June 08, 2007, 04:37:07 PM
there has already been an encrypted file transfer between two aMule clients a day before I left.
Nice!
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: Deus Ex on June 15, 2007, 05:38:02 PM
I suggest you to develop this protocol if not users will not use amule.People are not interested in the slowest  p2p software...

I'm from Italy too, but i dont think that we users can use such way of saying things, since the work of the aMule team is free as in freedom and as in free of charge. So, i think we can only give thanks, no one's paying them for what they've been doing. Even if i've got the problems you're talking about with my ISP, i feel good with what i have. If you dont, you can easily switch to other OS/platforms/clients.

aMule team: keep up with the good work!
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: Nerofumo on June 15, 2007, 08:32:17 PM
I suggest you to develop this protocol if not users will not use amule.People are not interested in the slowest  p2p software...

All of us are waiting for protocol obfuscation but, instead of claiming the new release in such a way, I prefer to wait patiently because it means to recognize and keep respect for the work the development team's doing. After all, nobody forces us to use aMule.
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: Axl_Mas on July 15, 2007, 11:10:17 PM
I tried Emule 0.48 with wine and it's working perfectly!
I'am am sad to abandon amule after 2 years of love, but it's develop is exasperated slow!
Bye aMule.....i loved you but now you are too old
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: Nerofumo on July 16, 2007, 01:28:09 AM
because of my job - i'm a dba consultant - i spend the most part of my time answering to people standing in front of my desk and asking "can you help me?", "may i..." "just five minutes...". I always say yes, but it's clear that they have to wait until i can spend my free time because i'm engaged in another activity. Sometimes answers come too late even if i'm trying to do my best".

I think they're trying to do their best, even if it's not too late but late enough.  ;)
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: wuischke on July 16, 2007, 08:31:22 AM
Well, frankly, we wished development would be faster as well. We're kind of stuck right now because the developer porting Protocol Obfuscation from eMule is currently very busy and we carry a half-finished implementation in our tarball for almost 2 months. Originally we wanted to release 2.2.0 in late May, now it's mid-july. :(
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: skolnick on July 16, 2007, 08:34:59 AM
Originally we wanted to release 2.2.0 in late May, now it's mid-july. :(
Notice that wuischke told no year, so please do not start whining on july 15th about "are we there yet?" ;). aMule devs are evil, and wuischke is no exception :D

Regards.
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: wuischke on July 16, 2007, 08:50:43 AM
No, I was not talking about the release date of 2.2.0, but about the current date.
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: rafuean on July 31, 2007, 03:01:40 PM
aMule devs are evil, and wuischke is no exception :D
sure they are, evil as hell  ;D
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: wuischke on August 27, 2007, 08:17:51 PM
Too late, It is already implemented since 19 August.

P.S. Please cease to post big images in every post or remove your signature. Since I'm using 1024x768 again I get easily annoyed and removing a post is far easier than editing out the image.
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: Kry on August 27, 2007, 09:42:05 PM
Obf will never be added to aMule.

FUD.

Given the fact it has been added for months, the TCP one, and for weeks, the TCP and UDP one.

Please restrain from posting false statements, insults, or any other similar thing. I am even less prone to pacience than wuischke is, so I'll proceed from now on to remove every post with any of those components, no questions asked or answered. Like I did already.
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: OldFrog on August 28, 2007, 12:18:42 AM

Obf will never be added to aMule.



Yes, and this is alll in our dreams (http://www.oldfrog.info/Linux/divers/obfusc_option.jpg)
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: Menion on August 28, 2007, 08:32:35 AM
Hi folks
So is Protocol Obfuscation working now in current SVN, or is it implemented but disabled? If  it works, I will make some test on my machine...
Bye and thaks to all!!!!
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: wuischke on August 28, 2007, 10:33:35 AM
It is implemented, works and support is enabled by default. You'll find the settings in preferences->security.
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: Menion on August 29, 2007, 10:01:54 AM
Thanks wuischke!!! I'm going to compile and use amuled + amulegui updating my old installation that doesn't have PO. Do I need to add something manually in amule.conf or will amuled add the proper lines (and eventually other modifications) itself? Bye!
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: wuischke on August 29, 2007, 10:23:52 AM
It will add everything by itself, but you might have to enable obfuscation support manually.

"Support Protocol Obfuscation" and "Use obfuscation for outgoing connections" -> You are in hybrid mode, fully supporting obfuscated and non-obfuscated connections.
"Accept only obfuscated connections" -> You support only obfuscated connections, this will most probably have a negative effect on the number of sources and no positive effects for normal users.
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: linuxfever on September 03, 2007, 02:18:20 AM
My provider doesn`t limit my p2p speed so "I" don`t need that feature. But as there are many other people with such providers I would go into hybrid mode for sure. All profit that way.

Great job done.
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: quimm2003 on September 05, 2007, 12:42:28 PM
Hi all,

Some months ago I've been forced to leave my loved aMule and begin using emulev48a under wine, for my ISP (the only one I can have in my location) begun cutting bandwith for p2p protocols.

Now I'm happy! I've returned to aMule!

Thank you guys for your efforts and your patience. I love you!

Quim.
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: Jonathan Métillon on June 14, 2008, 02:31:27 PM
aMule 2.2.1 released with Protocol Obfuscation! Thanks!

Goodbye Windows and/or Wine!

Too bad last Ubuntu 8.04 ships only aMule 2.2.0~svn20080218-0ubuntu4 Hope they'll update the repository with last binaries.
Title: Re: protocol obfuscation
Post by: Festor on June 16, 2008, 12:14:42 AM
Jonathan Métillon, aMule 2.2.0~svn20080218-0ubuntu4 has Protocol Obfuscation.


Please see http://forum.amule.org/index.php?topic=15230.0 for aMule 2.2.1 Ubuntu 8.04 deb packages