- *** New Software: UDP File Transfer Commercial Edition ***
- Posted by Skybuck Flying on December 6th, 2003
Hi,
UDP File Transfer Commercial Edition is a tool to transfer large files from
one computer to another computer using internet technology.
The software can be freely downloaded from Skybuck's website.
In demo mode:
+ Receiving files is possible.
+ Sending files is possible but the file's content will be garbled.
In full mode:
+ Receiving files is possible
+ Sending files is possible.
To switch to full mode one can buy an activation code online from the
webstore 
The software is located at:
http://www.mycgiserver.com/~skybuck
Have fun 
Bye,
Skybuck.
- Posted by News Account on December 6th, 2003
LOL - ever heard of FTP?
What else does your tool transfer from the hard disk? Buyer
beware!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Skybuck Flying" <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bqs8en$100$1@news1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl...
<snip>
- Posted by News Account on December 6th, 2003
LOL - ever heard of FTP?
What else does your tool transfer from the hard disk? Buyer
beware!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Skybuck Flying" <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bqs8en$100$1@news1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl...
<snip>
- Posted by Skybuck Flying on December 6th, 2003
The tool is still under active development.
It already has many properties which makes it better than FTP.
CRC32 checksums
AES encryption
192 Bit Tiger File hash.
Just to name a few
"News Account" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:czjAb.1213$2S4.1070@fe10...
- Posted by Skybuck Flying on December 6th, 2003
The tool is still under active development.
It already has many properties which makes it better than FTP.
CRC32 checksums
AES encryption
192 Bit Tiger File hash.
Just to name a few
"News Account" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:czjAb.1213$2S4.1070@fe10...
- Posted by James Knott on December 6th, 2003
Skybuck Flying wrote:
Ever hear of scp?
Here's some info, from the Linux man file
DESCRIPTION
scp copies files between hosts on a network. It uses ssh(1) for data
transfer, and uses the same authentication and provides the same security
as ssh(1). Unlike rcp(1), scp will ask for passwords or passphrases if they
are needed for authentication.
Any file name may contain a host and user specification to indicate that the
file is to be copied to/from that host. Copies between two remote hosts are
permitted.
The options are as follows:
-c cipher
Selects the cipher to use for encrypting the data transfer. This option is
directly passed to ssh(1).
-i identity_file
Selects the file from which the identity (private key) for RSA
authentication is read. This option is directly passed to ssh(1).
etc.
--
Fundamentalism is fundamentally wrong.
To reply to this message, replace everything to the left of "@" with
james.knott.
- Posted by James Knott on December 6th, 2003
Skybuck Flying wrote:
Ever hear of scp?
Here's some info, from the Linux man file
DESCRIPTION
scp copies files between hosts on a network. It uses ssh(1) for data
transfer, and uses the same authentication and provides the same security
as ssh(1). Unlike rcp(1), scp will ask for passwords or passphrases if they
are needed for authentication.
Any file name may contain a host and user specification to indicate that the
file is to be copied to/from that host. Copies between two remote hosts are
permitted.
The options are as follows:
-c cipher
Selects the cipher to use for encrypting the data transfer. This option is
directly passed to ssh(1).
-i identity_file
Selects the file from which the identity (private key) for RSA
authentication is read. This option is directly passed to ssh(1).
etc.
--
Fundamentalism is fundamentally wrong.
To reply to this message, replace everything to the left of "@" with
james.knott.
- Posted by Skybuck Flying on December 6th, 2003
"James Knott" <bit_bucket@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:4WjAb.131572$ZmO.117104@news01.bloor.is.net.c able.rogers.com...
Yes a little bit.
Unfortunately I don't use linux.
Yes scp is based on TCP. TCP itself has weak checksums and TCP can be slow
over wireless networks and even gigabit networks because of various reasons.
My tool however uses the UDP protocol and it's own algorithms and protocols
which remain secret for the time being.
These protocols have been designed to achieve higher and more reliable
performance than TCP.
I believe that my tool is ready for the future ( gigabit networks and
wireless networks ).
The current implementation is of average speed.
On a pentium 166 with encryption and checksums and tiger hash enabled it
achieves 200 kilotebyte/sec at the moment over a 10 megabit network. TCP
achieves 500 kilobyte/sec.
However pentium 166's mhz are old technology. I'll bet most users have a
Pentium 4, 2000+ mhz.
So I think my tool might achieve higher performance on these kind of
computers.
It would be great if someone could test my tool on this kind of setup and
report the speed:
Pentium 4, 2000+ mhz <---- 100 or 1000 megabit connection ----> Pentium
4, 2000+mhz
I would not be surprised if on such a setup it would achieve the maximum
harddisk write speed, which is about 4 MB/sec for an average harddisk.
RSA could be interesting to implement as an extra option for establishing a
symetric key.
However I do think that RSA is not ultra safe. I think it is vunerable to
man-in-the-middle attack.
Skybuck.
- Posted by Skybuck Flying on December 6th, 2003
"James Knott" <bit_bucket@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:4WjAb.131572$ZmO.117104@news01.bloor.is.net.c able.rogers.com...
Yes a little bit.
Unfortunately I don't use linux.
Yes scp is based on TCP. TCP itself has weak checksums and TCP can be slow
over wireless networks and even gigabit networks because of various reasons.
My tool however uses the UDP protocol and it's own algorithms and protocols
which remain secret for the time being.
These protocols have been designed to achieve higher and more reliable
performance than TCP.
I believe that my tool is ready for the future ( gigabit networks and
wireless networks ).
The current implementation is of average speed.
On a pentium 166 with encryption and checksums and tiger hash enabled it
achieves 200 kilotebyte/sec at the moment over a 10 megabit network. TCP
achieves 500 kilobyte/sec.
However pentium 166's mhz are old technology. I'll bet most users have a
Pentium 4, 2000+ mhz.
So I think my tool might achieve higher performance on these kind of
computers.
It would be great if someone could test my tool on this kind of setup and
report the speed:
Pentium 4, 2000+ mhz <---- 100 or 1000 megabit connection ----> Pentium
4, 2000+mhz
I would not be surprised if on such a setup it would achieve the maximum
harddisk write speed, which is about 4 MB/sec for an average harddisk.
RSA could be interesting to implement as an extra option for establishing a
symetric key.
However I do think that RSA is not ultra safe. I think it is vunerable to
man-in-the-middle attack.
Skybuck.
- Posted by Steinar Haug on December 6th, 2003
["Skybuck Flying"]
| Yes scp is based on TCP. TCP itself has weak checksums and TCP can be slow
| over wireless networks and even gigabit networks because of various reasons.
|
| My tool however uses the UDP protocol and it's own algorithms and protocols
| which remain secret for the time being.
|
| These protocols have been designed to achieve higher and more reliable
| performance than TCP.
Ah, you're going to reinvent a "better" TCP. Good luck, lots of people
have tried to do this. Meanwhile, I'll stick with TCP and applications
like scp.
| I believe that my tool is ready for the future ( gigabit networks and
| wireless networks ).
|
| The current implementation is of average speed.
|
| On a pentium 166 with encryption and checksums and tiger hash enabled it
| achieves 200 kilotebyte/sec at the moment over a 10 megabit network. TCP
| achieves 500 kilobyte/sec.
A Pentium-166 with a decent operating system (e.g. FreeBSD) can saturate
a 100 Mbps Ethernet link.
Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no
- Posted by Steinar Haug on December 6th, 2003
["Skybuck Flying"]
| Yes scp is based on TCP. TCP itself has weak checksums and TCP can be slow
| over wireless networks and even gigabit networks because of various reasons.
|
| My tool however uses the UDP protocol and it's own algorithms and protocols
| which remain secret for the time being.
|
| These protocols have been designed to achieve higher and more reliable
| performance than TCP.
Ah, you're going to reinvent a "better" TCP. Good luck, lots of people
have tried to do this. Meanwhile, I'll stick with TCP and applications
like scp.
| I believe that my tool is ready for the future ( gigabit networks and
| wireless networks ).
|
| The current implementation is of average speed.
|
| On a pentium 166 with encryption and checksums and tiger hash enabled it
| achieves 200 kilotebyte/sec at the moment over a 10 megabit network. TCP
| achieves 500 kilobyte/sec.
A Pentium-166 with a decent operating system (e.g. FreeBSD) can saturate
a 100 Mbps Ethernet link.
Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no
- Posted by Skybuck Flying on December 6th, 2003
"Steinar Haug" <sthaug@nethelp.no> wrote in message
news:bqsoi0.84b.1@verdi.nethelp.no...
Hmm, not going, did.
0.01% luck, 10% inspiration, 30% research, 30% practice, 10% brains and
19.99% transpiration lol.
Sounds like you have no other choice on FreeBSD to bad.
It's not the operating system at fault. It's TCP at fault. There are
documents about that.
TCP can only saturate for 33% to 40%.
People have reported my UDP Speed Test tool to achieve good speeds at 99%
saturation.
The goal has been set
--
UDP File Transfer Commercial Edition available at:
http://www.mycgiserver.com/~skybuck
- Posted by Skybuck Flying on December 6th, 2003
"Steinar Haug" <sthaug@nethelp.no> wrote in message
news:bqsoi0.84b.1@verdi.nethelp.no...
Hmm, not going, did.
0.01% luck, 10% inspiration, 30% research, 30% practice, 10% brains and
19.99% transpiration lol.
Sounds like you have no other choice on FreeBSD to bad.
It's not the operating system at fault. It's TCP at fault. There are
documents about that.
TCP can only saturate for 33% to 40%.
People have reported my UDP Speed Test tool to achieve good speeds at 99%
saturation.
The goal has been set
--
UDP File Transfer Commercial Edition available at:
http://www.mycgiserver.com/~skybuck
- Posted by Lucas Tam on December 6th, 2003
"Skybuck Flying" <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in news:bqssmd$l5o$1
@news3.tilbu1.nb.home.nl:
I'm sure you did... whether the world will accept it is a different story
: ) : ) : )
--
Lucas Tam (REMOVEnntp@rogers.com)
Please delete "REMOVE" from the e-mail address when replying.
http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/coolspot18/
- Posted by Lucas Tam on December 6th, 2003
"Skybuck Flying" <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in news:bqssmd$l5o$1
@news3.tilbu1.nb.home.nl:
I'm sure you did... whether the world will accept it is a different story
: ) : ) : )
--
Lucas Tam (REMOVEnntp@rogers.com)
Please delete "REMOVE" from the e-mail address when replying.
http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/coolspot18/
- Posted by Ian Stirling on December 6th, 2003
In alt.internet.wireless Skybuck Flying <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Flat-out lie.
Or maybe you are just incapable of performing the measurements.
I routinely see well over 90% over my home network, and around
the same when downloading over my internet link with ten simultaneous
streams of different bandwidth.
- Posted by Ian Stirling on December 6th, 2003
In alt.internet.wireless Skybuck Flying <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Flat-out lie.
Or maybe you are just incapable of performing the measurements.
I routinely see well over 90% over my home network, and around
the same when downloading over my internet link with ten simultaneous
streams of different bandwidth.
- Posted by Skybuck Flying on December 6th, 2003
"Ian Stirling" <root@mauve.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:HHrAb.17905$lm1.148510@wards.force9.net...
We have a mis-understanding here.
The document was about TCP and highspeed networks. Like gigabit networks.
The document contained text like:
TCP can only saturate for 33% to 40% on gigabit links over the internet.
Sure I believe that especially the part about multiple tcp connections.
Skybuck.
- Posted by Skybuck Flying on December 6th, 2003
"Ian Stirling" <root@mauve.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:HHrAb.17905$lm1.148510@wards.force9.net...
We have a mis-understanding here.
The document was about TCP and highspeed networks. Like gigabit networks.
The document contained text like:
TCP can only saturate for 33% to 40% on gigabit links over the internet.
Sure I believe that especially the part about multiple tcp connections.
Skybuck.
- Posted by Dan Swartzendruber on December 6th, 2003
In article <bqtj9q$cg5$1@news4.tilbu1.nb.home.nl>, nospam@hotmail.com
says...
How many people have gigabit links to the outside world?
