Free IPv6 News Servers

i was using this service just fine. now u put it up for everybody to use thus killing the server. good job

cho bomboclaat man.

its a good thing i have another server as backup


What the hell are you talking about, the company giving access away is testing their IPv6, it will eventually be pay for, it's only for testing :lol: Besides your backup server is already posted in this thread, so good luck with that :lol:
 
not sure about other servers but you only need to change the program to an open port on your pc, assuming yout talking aboud SABnzbd+. For example, if port 8080 is not available than u can change it to 8081 0r 8082 and so forth.

Also I'm thinking that you probably are restarting the SABnzbd+ instead of opening it in your web browser. You need to bookmark http://localhost:8080/sabnzbd/ and open it if you close the original web page that opened once you started SABnzbd+. Once you open SABnzbd+ it will run in the background and you can only terminate it by pressing shutdown in the home tab or through task manager. So if you keep opening the SABnzbd+ program it will search for a new port because there is an already existing SABnzbd+ process that is using your specified port.

The downloads stop if only if you get disconnected from the servers so its either something with the servers or the go6 tunnel. It could also be your connection if you have wireless.

Hope this helps . . .

question of my own . . . how would you monitor the bandwidth that is used by the ipv6 tunnel?
 
I think there are any open port. Otherwise I would not explain the following messages when I'm behind a router:

Code:
2009-04-28 23:36:36,437 ERROR [newswrapper] Failed to connect: (10049, "Can't assign requested address") [email protected]:119
2009-04-28 23:36:37,125 ERROR [newswrapper] Failed to connect: (10049, "Can't assign requested address") [email protected]:119
2009-04-28 23:36:38,530 ERROR [newswrapper] Failed to connect: (10049, "Can't assign requested address") [email protected]:119
2009-04-28 23:36:38,530 ERROR [newswrapper] Failed to connect: (10049, "Can't assign requested address") [email protected]:119
2009-04-28 23:36:38,530 ERROR [newswrapper] Failed to connect: (10049, "Can't assign requested address") [email protected]:119
 
Well my routers is setup from package to plug in, no additional settings, and all forms of the IPv6 connections work for me, even uTorrent works like it should.
 
for over a day now both servers have stopped working.....for me at least.

while newszilla6.xs4all.nl is not even pingable here,i assume its HW's been taken down and/or offline ?

news.ipv6.eweka.nl as almost always, is still pingable, BUT apparently not running the news ipv6 server SW anymore as even telnetting to port 119 doesnt seem to return anything there for over 24 hours, logs seem to indicate no data flowing just after 5am tuesday morning.

anyone else seeing this form the UK Virginmedia connections at least ?


this old Usenet story they ruled on today also bothers me, it just seems wrong, what happened to "mere conduit" defence ?

http://torrentfreak.com/the-riaa-attacks-usenet-071016/
The RIAA Attacks Usenet
Written by enigmax on October 16, 2007


and '"Well, Usenet.com have lost.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/07...a_usenet_case/
RIAA claims victory in Usenet.com copyright case

'Direct, contributory, vicarious infringement'

By Kelly Fiveash • Get more from this author

Posted in Music and Media, 1st July 2009 11:48 GMT

"Quote:
A US district judge has ruled in favour of the Recording Industry Ass. of America (RIAA) in the copyright case brought against Usenet.com that kicked off in autumn 2007.

“We’re pleased that the court recognised not just that Usenet.com directly infringed the record companies’ copyrights but also took action against the defendants for their egregious litigation misconduct,” said the RIAA in a short statement yesterday.

...

Judge Harold Baer of the Southern District of New York court dished out the ruling. He found Usenet.com guilty of “direct, contributory, and vicarious infringement”.

There's no word yet on what penalty the judge has hit Usenet.com "

Bad news for all Usenet users. Whether you use it to download legal files or otherwise, you could find your provider hit anyway."'

again, perhaps we NEED to setup some free smaller binary usenet peering somewere, or i at least cant continue using it as is, shame.
 
doesnt work
38448550.jpg
 
You can find a program in Go6 for those who are behind a router .

Sorry man, but i can't find it :frusty:
Do you mean the OpenWRT client, firmware to install in the router ?
I've tried OpenWRT but my router didn't behave well, didn't have wifi and so on ...

Is there any windows aplication to pass the router :cry:
 
Because I did all that before with XP and not Vista, and I noticed when I installed Vista it had it under my connections, now I can't remember if uTorrent was installed or not.

I'm running Windows 7 now, and my adapter shows it's installed.

picture.php
 
do i take it then that the lack of replys means it's still working fine for you ?

this is really strange if so, as iv changed the tunnnel from amsterdam to montreal and got a new IP, but the news servers are still not there or refusing connection etc.... so its not an IP blocking thing, and with no changes to my once working SAB+ and no new OS or software additions since it stoped working....to account for it at my end.

im loath to go back to torrents full time as their so slow compared to these free binary usenet...
 
Are you doing it just like in the guides at the front of this page?

Vista comes with IPv6 enabled, Opera confirms it. If I load SABnzbd and a nzb it should go like a bandit. It's not connecting.

So I load the Gateway6 Client, it connects. Then I load SABnzbd and a nzb, and it still fails to connect.

SABnzbd is using the same login data as the Gateway6 Client.

Now walk me forward from that.
 
I'm on Vista. Opera works with IPv6, Firefox doesn't. This is both before and after I installed the Gateway6 Client. In other words, the client has no bearing... other than auth for the network. If not for that, I could remove it. Right?
 
Back
Top