dslreports logo
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery


how-to block ads

Search Topic:
share rss forum feed

Billy Brethr

San Antonio, TX

2 edits

D-Link Routers Won't Work with emule's Kad

Over the last few weeks I have identified a problem with my D-Link 614+ router and the P2P software "emule". Apparently, emule uses a relatively new feature called "Kademlia" (or "Kad", for short) that places an unusually high level of "strain" on the router. Kad is a feature of emule, and it is not necessary to have this feature enabled when using emule. However, it is said that having Kad enabled greatly improves the speed and efficiency of P2P downloads when using emule.

What the Problem is:
I am not a tech, but as I understand it, the DLink/Kad problem has something to do with a "NAT list", too many connections being open and the router's inability to deal with the "overload". The result of this overload is that the router crashes and resets, thereby causing a loss of connection, interrupting the down & upload process and dramatically increasing the up and download times and efficiency.

Primarily the problem SEEMS to affect D-Link routers, although I have seen at least one report of a non-D-Link router having the same problem. And it does not seem to effect ALL DLink- routers; most of the reports I have seen are from owners of DLink 6xx series routers.

This also seems to be a relatively new problem; it started occurring with widespread frequency with the latest revision of emule (v0.45b). Apparently, while the "Kad" feature had been part of previous versions of emule, the latest revision had this feature enabled as a default setting. As more people update the emule software, more people have Kad enabled, resulting in more complaints.

Most of my information has come from the official emule web-site & Discussion Forums. It is anecdotal (and usually anonymous) information and so therefore cannot be taken as completely authoritative, however the complaints are numerous enough to be certain that there is definitely a problem.

How the Problem Manifests
For myself and many other user’s, the problem happens immediately upon updating to the newest version of emule. The software seems to function normally, until the Error Message “Local Area Network: A Cable is Unplugged” appears in a yellow WinXp ballon in the lower right corner of the screen. This error goes away when the router resets itself, but persistently appears and re-appears constantly. The time between router crashes can vary anywhere from 5 minutes to an hour or two.

Solutions Available
While reading through the official emule Discussion Forum, reports of DLink’s Customer Service in identifying this problem and helping DLink router owners that are affected have been less than stellar, which is the reason I have started this thread. I note that DLink also seems to have earned a “spotty” reputation on this Forum as well regarding their responsiveness to Customer Concerns.

However, DLink does seem to respond to some degree to some issues. I sent an e-mail to DLink attempting to get some kind of resolution to my problem and got no response.

I have heard of a few solutions offered. The most common (and dumbest, in my opinion) is to simply disable Kad when using emule. I refuse to simply accept that my DLink router is not fully functional and run up the white flag of surrender without any official word from DLink publically stating that my DLink router will not work with emule and that there is nothing that they can do. It seems that there are some Representatives from DLink that have made some fairly superficial scratches on the surface of this issue, but have more clearly demonstrated a great reluctance to even “officially” admit the problem, much less provide clear direction to their dissatisfied customers on what concrete solutions (if any) are available.

Another suggested solution involves making some Registry Entry changes. I did not do this one because I did not have reason to trust the source of the information, as changing the Registry can be somewhat risky. This solution seemed to be “tweaking” WinXp into behaving in a way that would allow my DLink 614+ to function with Kad enabled. I did not even try to do this, and would not recommend anyone else to do so either, for the following reasons.

First, I do not have any reason to believe in the credibility of the person that posted this suggestion, and making Registry Entry changes is risky. It may have been a “crank” post. It may only apply to certain systems that have only particular hardware & software. Also, the suggestion never clearly shows how a failure on DLink’s router to work with emule’s software can be corrected by “tweaking” WinXp’s firewall. In short, it created more “scary possibilities” than it appeared to promise to fix.

One suggestion was for a user to do some “port forwarding”, and the problem would be solved in this way. But the source was not “proven” to be credible, and the technical expertise involved in doing this seemed rather involved, with no explicit promise of guaranteed results.

Others have suggested that perhaps DLink might be able to solve the problem by updating their firmware. But others have suggested that perhaps the problem is with DLink’s hardware, and the problem can not be solved by modifying the firmware.

Many people suggest the problem might best be solved by purchasing a new Router, and throwing the DLink into the trash can.

Why I Wrote this Post
I have assembled this information here in the hopes of sparking an informative discussion between people who may be more knowledgable of these issues than myself. The first participant I would like to see involved in this discussion is a technologically-qualified official representative from DLink, who can address this issue in a direct manner, bring resolution to these many problems and prove that DLink stands by their products and their customers.

Interested persons can find more information regarding this problem by reading the thread at this link:


Good Bye My Friend

Re: Testing Edit


is for testing site features.

Jaffe Joffer

New London, CT
reply to Billy Brethr

Re: D-Link Routers Won't Work with emule's Kad

I have the same problem with my DI-604. Have you heard any solutions yet?

The One


1 edit
reply to Billy Brethr


This KAD problem is not new & is not only
D-Link problem. Actually, all Home/Small Business
class Router also have this problem.

The solution is to Limit the KAD connections to
100-200. Remember, We are all using Cheap
SOHO Router, not a industrial class Router which is
10 times plus more expensive.

Another solution is to buy a Business Class Router,
be prepare to have $1000 to $unknown in your pocket
for this KAD super hobby...!

»DI-624 Firmware update w/ Crash Recovery Step by S --
»[Info] Some Clue about DI-624 Reboot


reply to Billy Brethr

Hi everyone,

I have followed this emule issues with dlink wifi routers, and I wanted to mention something just to have it confirmed by someone else. I have a DI-624 with fw 2.42, and we are using two Centrino laptops behind it to access the internet. Because the bandwidth here is pretty expensive compared to other places, as of now we have a 256/64kb dsl link.

On both laptops we use Linux instead of Windows, so we are using the amule client instead of "emule". Many times, we leave the two laptops downloading files sometimes a whole weekend and, thanks god, we have not seen reboots as often as mentioned in the forum. I've checked the logs on the 624's and only once I saw my two laptops reconnect at almost the same hour sometime at 6:20 AM, so it might've been a reboot or a glitch on the power supply, but only that time I saw a reconnect in say something like two or three months... (I've had the 624's for almost a year now).

Of course, I do have configured both machines in a polite way in order to continue to use the internet while donwloading (restricting the bw available for upload/download and the number of connections to something around a few hundreds on each machine) but it works mostly ok.

So, if someone reading this has the recurrent reboot problem even while surfing with dlink routers, can you plase give it a try using linux and see if the problem remains? If you have a full windows machine, you can try knoppix or some other livecd distro and do the test. If you can install linux on your machine in a separate partition, even better so you can build amule on it. I'm just wondering if maybe windows is leaving too many connections open (I have seen this in our internal servers back in the office with windows 2k, like too many connections in time_wait state) compared to the linux boxes doing similar stuff, so that it is "helping" the router to overflow its internal tables and reboot.

my 2 cents...

ps : I have my 624 connected to a dwl-2100 in client mode, and that 2100 is connected to a 624 of a friend located at about a block away from my home, where the real dsl link is. When I saw the possible reboot on my 624, there was no correspondig reboot on the remote 624. When both machines are downlading at good speed, I usually do a "wget » " and "wget »" , in order to check both my 624 and my friend's 624 in terms of how they are doing with the # of connections. Most of the time they have somewhere about 300 to 500 connections.

Then again, maybe this problem only happens when having more bandwitdh to the Internet or maybe amule just works different enough from emule+kad to make it "nicer" to the dlink boxes, but then again, I have never used the windows client of emule...

Billy Brethr

San Antonio, TX
reply to Billy Brethr

This KAD problem is not new & is not only
D-Link problem. Actually, all Home/Small Business
class Router also have this problem.

All Home/Small business class routers do NOT have this problem. This assertion has been made several times on the eMule forum by people suspected of being DLink techs, posting "anonymously" and unofficially. It has been completely disproven by the fact that large numbers of Users of "Home" class routers are able to use the Kad feature just fine. There are even reports of "Home" class DLink router Users that are able to use the Kad feature, depending on the model number. Some DLink users have achieved full functionality by firmware updates provided by DLink. No such firmware update has come from DLink for the 614+.

The solution is to Limit the KAD connections to

This is another suggetion that has been proven to be ineffective. My Kad connections have been limited to as little as 25 and it hasn't improved the functionality of my 614+ one bit.

Another solution is to buy a Business Class Router,
be prepare to have $1000 to $unknown in your pocket
for this KAD super hobby...!

Which is not a solution at all. Nor is in on-topic or even funny.

I have the same problem with my DI-604. Have you heard any solutions yet?

If you read the initial post, I superficially mention that there are many "solutions" offered up; none of them make the routers fully-functional. Only turning off Kad prevents the router from crashing.

There was a "solution" I read about that involved "port forwarding", but this experience has made me cynical. I have seen too many posts that "throw up" "suggestions", but nothing that comes from a source with any real crediblity. Plus I didn't really understand the whole concept of "port forwarding" anyways, and couldn't see how it would help.


reply to Billy Brethr

I don't understand why your complaint is with D-Link. Isn't this an eMule problem that affects an unknown number of routers? Don't these routers work fine with other p2p programs? Shouldn't eMule provide some way to configure the number of connections and other router resources that Kad uses, and set a conservative default? Do you have any idea how many people will immediately give up on the eMule/Kad network rather than invest time and effort in finding a solution, even if D-Link is able to provide one? Is it possible that the eMule developers get great big chubbies from creating software that treats every user's system, in the words of one proud eMule message board poster, as a "medium web server under attack"?


reply to Billy Brethr

No, I'm not a D-Link tech. I'm just a guy who uses his home network for multiple purposes, as do many users, and do not care to run a program that places such a demand on system resources. Even if D-Link were to "fix the problem", I'm sure I would soon find other problems with eMule/Kad in its current state. What happens to my son, for example, who is trying to play a real-time game on Battle.net with one computer while I'm using eMule on the other? P2p software that requires a huge resource commitment from users will never be widely used. But I'm sure that the sophisticates who do make the commitment will receive enormous satisfaction from being better than the rest of us; much more satifaction than they would receive if we were able to share our files with them.

Billy Brethren

reply to zimisanalien

Do you have any idea how many people will immediately give up on the eMule/Kad network rather than invest time and effort in finding a solution, even if D-Link is able to provide one?/
No, I think that most user's will come to associate their D-Link router as being less than fully functional and toss it in the trash at first opportunity. D-Link and it's routers are "dime a dozen". D-Link is merely "competitive" with the rest of the industry, and eMule is revolutionary.

But D-Link isn't REALLY "competitive", it is sub-standard and you have to pay REAL MONEY in order to have the privledge of using a sub-standard router. eMule is free, it will always be free and it will always have a place in the worldwide file-sharing community.

The real issue is, after the eMule user decides to buy another router to replace their sub-standard D-Link, will they buy ANOTHER (potentially sub-standard) D-Link router, or will they play it safe and buy a router from a different manufacturer that has a deserved reputation for functionality, reliability and responsiveness to customer concerns ?

This forum is a perfect example of sub-standard Customer Service from D-Link. It is non-intuitive, difficult to use, navigate or derive any useful information from. Yet 20 minutes ago "Dan", a tech supprort representative from D-Link suggested that I come here for answers because ...

Because he didn't have any.

And he sent me HERE because D-Link doesn't even provide an Discussion Forum to their customers so that they can maybe solve their problems with D-Link routers on their own. Instead D-Link sends you HERE, where you will get discouraged and give up, feeling like maybe the problem is with you (the User) rather than with D-Link and their sub-standard routers.

Chip Zero

reply to zimisanalien

What you're proposing as a 'solution' is the same one we are using now; neutering eMule. eMule works fine without Kad and might - just might - work without crashes with a neutered/limited Kad. But it still won't work as well as full Kad, that provides more download sources and accessibility to firewalled users. So in the end, the only real solution is to fix the router(s).

Billy Brethren

reply to Billy Brethr

AND...as long as the time seems right, I really think you should define yourself on this issue, because frankly I don't see how any of it is your concern anyways. You are not an eMule User, obviously. Nor a DLink owner that has a problem. So why do you care? Sticking your nose in a matter that does not pertain to you, and you admit you have no real concern in. Unless you are lying and you are in fact some kind of advocate for DLink. Whatever. It's not your issue, unless you want to change your rap and provide some reason for getting involved. Otherwise, you can kindly step off.


Kanata, ON
reply to Billy Brethr

All corporations are the same. They are entrusted to make money for the shareholders, make a profit, and grow the company.

When a giant mistake in design judgement is made, and then is incorporated into most of the companies' products lines, then this is really bad news.

Corporate cronies do not want to spread such bad news, and even try to counter such news with misinformation. Corporate misinformation is commonplace to combat liability and loss in stock value. Tobacco companies ring a bell?

My SMC7004abr Rev.1 router works great with Kad.

When my previous SMC7004abr broke down last summer, I BOUGHT A NEW SMC7004abr Rev.2 to tie me over until the RMA shipment came.

SMC changed the hardware of the Rev.2 and screwed up the design. The Rev.2 model did not work with Xbox Live--It dropped the NAT session of any prior Xboxes already logged into Live. To get the dropped Xboxes to be able to log into Live again, you had to power cycle/reboot the Rev.2 router. I took that Rev.2 model back to the store.

SMC tech support would never admit that their newer model routers, including a SMC2804abr wireless-g model, has a screw-up in it. This 2804abr router also drops the NAT sessions of any prior Xboxes already logged into Live. A hint to me was given by SMC tech support that the new designs use an (ASIC?) hardware stateful packet inspection (SPI) mechanism. Since ASIC hardware setup fees can run around $2 Million, SMC were also quick not to admit any mistake about their newer routers: "I'm sorry--we cannot help you. Thankyou for choosing SMC."

SMC techs said that they did not think that _ANY_ firmware revision would circumvent this hardware situation. Because of this, they would not issue any RMA for the 2804abr since it was working as it was designed to. And that most routers could not possibly manage to work perfectly with all networking applications. (But my older Rev.1 unit seems to do pretty well...)

I went to a different store, got a DLINK DI-604. It worked great with Xbox Live, but did not work with Kad even with those prior versions of eMule of that time. The router would reboot every 1m:30s and sometimes would run longer. When it was up and running (before crashing), the speed would be about 15% of full bandwidth (that is crappy). My connection is supposed to be 5000 kbps DL / 800 kbps UL so my net traffic may overwhelm the router much more quickly than a slower guy's connection to the Net. My computer's OS is also capable of thousands of network connections.

I promptly returned the junky DI-604 to the store...

I had no such troubles since SMC shipped me back a replacement Rev.1 SMC7004abr router.

The time frame for a mistake to be flushed out of the R & D pipeline may be a couple of years depending on what the Lawyers and Accountants for the company assess as the priorities for rapid corrective measures.

Remember that SMC has to spend another $2 M setup for another ASIC, and they also have to design a different ASIC that will remedy the current problem. More $$$, and in the mean time they want to minimize the loss in sales revenue. No notice for current and future SMC & Microsoft Xbox Live users has been listed on either companies' web sites (last that I checked).

DLink may also have to redesign stuff. More Ram to track more connections. Larger containing enclosures to deal with the component heat, software debugging with the new units, determining how much RAM will satisfy "most users" that are using Kad. Maybe they scrimped on FLASH size too? Although prices for flash are coming down, they have to compete with makers of Jump drives, MP3 players, and camera memory card manufacturers for demand. Some of the flash memory devices cost as much as the routers do! If they are using super small flash memory size, they might be forced to use ASSEMBLY LANGUAGE. If they had a larger flash memory size, perhaps they could use C++ instead of ASSEMBLER to program the embedded system of their router(s).

Will the Accountants let them spend wildly to permit growth of broadand Internet users? Who knows???

Billy Brethren


Well thanks for the very well-written and thoughtful post. Truly one of the best I have ever read.

I understnad the basic message is that DLink is never going to admit there is a problem with their routers, due to larger "more global" financial concerns.

I have s tory of my own, that may indicate that it might not HAVE to be this way.

I dated someone who worked in a hospital, and as part of their "continuing training" they were CONSTANTLY reminded of who to deal with family members of patients that died in situations where "something had gone wrong". A staff member miscalulates a drug dose, or a Doctor misdiagnoses a patient whose health is already compromised (these were usually older and sometimes terminally ill patients) and unfortunately the patient would occasionally die as a result.

The Hospital's Legal Department was absolutely adament that no Hospital Staff would give any information that was not extremely rigidly controlled. The point here was to keep the dead patient's family as uninformed of the circumstances of the patient's death as possible, so as to prevent them from gaining enough understanding in order to generate a viable legal action.

Over a period of a few years, it was discovered that, rather than diminishing the number of lawsuits against the hospital (and the finacial liability that came with them) in fact the number of lawsuits actually INCREASED.

The hostile environment that was created my the Hospital's Legal Department actually caused frustrated and angry family members to seek legal action when the might not have in other circumstances. After the policy was "softened" regarding the dissemination of information to patients family members, legal actions against the hospital decreased.

My analysis of the situation is that people in general respond better when they are involved in more trusting relationships than they do when the relationship is adverserial. I believe this idea translates to the situation with DLink (and any other company). And while a angry or disappointed customer may not go to the extreme of actually suing DLink, it is VERY likely that they would put extra effort into making sure they never buy their product again.

So while I completely agree with your analysis of the situation, I do not believe that this is a wise strategy in the long-term. Ulitmately DLink could lose much more than the cost of "making good" on the immediate situation.

This experience has been a good one for me, I think. I have applied the lessons in the value of good Customer Service in purchasing new electronics equipment. I have learned to be willing to spend a little more in order to have the intangible benefits of doing business with a company that stands by their products & services.


New York, NY

Thought i added my experience to this :

I did have many reboot problems too with emule however when i made sure my PC was not in the DMZ, when i upgraded to the latest version of emule ( version 0.45B this seems to be VERY important as the authors mention they fixed some of the router, this is related to how many open conenctions and how emule is handling connections) i have no Further problems. My D-link 624 Never reboots any more !
(i do have gaming mode on also this seems to causde me the least emule probs).

after exchanging some emails with some experts its in fact not the router but mostly how emule and others handle connections. alot changed in version 0.45b and since i use this one i never rebooted anymore (am using bios 2.52).

IN a nutshell my setup:
-dlink 624 bios 2.52 version 54
-pc NOT in dmz but with virtual server ports open for emule and kad
- gaming mode on



reply to Chip Zero

From Chip zero: "So in the end, the only real solution is to fix the router(s)."

My DI-604 always has worked fine with other p2p programs, so I don't understand why you say the problem is only with the router and the only solution is to fix the router. Why isn't it possible to fix Kad by allowing the user to limit the number of connections it uses?


reply to Billy Brethren

I'm not really sure who you were addressing in this post, but if it's me, I'll tell you who I am. I am a software engineer and a D-Link DI-604 owner who never had a problem with this router until I tried to use eMule to share files. Over the years, I have shared thousands of files on Napster, AudioGalaxy, Kazaa, etc. I tried eMule, found this problem, and stopped using eMule. My opinion is this: an application that assumes that all of a user's system and network resources exist only for that application to use shows inferior design by an arrogant programmer. My network is used for multiple applications at the same time. Why are eMule/Kad users so proud of the fact that Kad breaks inferior routers? Why do they reject the idea that Kad should be fixed so that it will work with limited resources? Judging from the posts here, a number of applications have problems with a number of routers, and the time and cost to fix a router hardware problem (that can't be fixed in firmware) is prohibitive. This argues for fixing the applications instead of the routers.

And just who are you to accuse others of being D-Link propagandists, accuse them of having no legitimate interest in this problem, and tell them to "step off"? Dou you have any evidence to support these accusations? Are you perhaps one of the arrogant Kad developers, unable to admit that Kad may need fixing, because that would make you less than perfect? Or are you a propagandist from a D-Link competitor, urging users to trash their D-Link router and buy a different brand?

Chip Zero


eMule's Kad works quite different from other peer-to-peer software. Most implementations use the notion of a server that handles most of the load, or of super-nodes. Kad is completely decentralized. Another difference is that it uses UDP packets a lot more than other P2P programs do (which can save a lot of overhead).

As said before in this topic, you really can't limit the load on one of the nodes without limiting the load on the whole network and thereby reducing it's effectiveness. There may be some other solutions - similar to the supernode approach perhaps - but then you wouldn't divide the load equally anymore and, again, make the network less effective. Besides, why 'fix' a working program/protocol/network just because router's don't handle UDP packets like they should?

If there are too many UDP packets, routers are allowed to simply drop some of them. This is what UDP is all about; it has low overhead and routers may drop its packets. TCP packets on the other hand (the normal kind of packets, e.g. used to display this page) should never be dropped. Clearly, if a router starts to reboot if there are too many UDP packets, it's a problem with the router. As I explained before, limiting the Kad network is not the desirable approach to fix this. A better approach is to simply disable Kad - it's just an addition to the normal ed2k server protocol so eMule still works - and wait for vendors to fix their routers. Which evidently can take a while when your vendor is too busy implementing new features and breaking old ones, instead of fixing existing problems...

Frank Zappa

reply to Billy Brethr

I had the same problem

the solution i found was to reduce the number of ACTIVE downloads.... Just let 5 or 6 downloads in RESUME mode and STOP the others...

okay, you must manage your list forever, but its a simple way to gt rid of this prob..

hope it help

sorry for my english

Abouter Router

reply to Billy Brethr

Well I am a very high-level Executive in a large, multi-national electronics corporation, and my D-Link 614+ doesn't work with KAD either.

Who do those KAD people with their pretentious and newfangled EMULE think thay ARE ?? Taking advantage of the full extent of internationally recogized standards for data transmission, thay have SHAMELESSLY uncovered how CERTAIN CORPORATIONS have been profiting by selling SUB-STANDARD electronics equipment. These EMULE people are completely devoid of any sense of obligation to the community. First they expect their electronics equipment to be as functional as everyone else, THEN they take pride in BREAKING substandard equipment! What's next ? I bet thay are going to download all SORTS of data as fast as thay possibly can, without any concerns for D-Link's profitability or how the community percieves their products.

These people need to learn to SLOW DOWN and smell the roses. Thay download way too much data, way too fast and create all sorts of problems for people.

My D-Link router doesn't work with KAD either, but I DON'T CARE. That's why I am posting this message; as an example and a role model for other dissatisfied D-Link owners. You should be like me, and not care about the quality of the equipment you by. Do P2P downloading with another, slower software, preferably on that has been trademarked and copyrighted, so that we in the media industry can CONTROL what you can and can't download. We want to know WHAT you are downloading and we want to know WHO YOU ARE.

Heck, what if EVERYONE used e-mule ? Then we couldn't pressure P2P software producers into producing the kind of software we want them too. Then we ALL lose money. (Well, WE do anyways...)

So that is why I am here. To tell everyone to stop using e-maul. It's bad, and causes problems for everyone cause it goes too fast and makes some people look bad and that makes them unhappy.

That's how I became a high-level corporate Executive. By insisting in participating in discussions that I have no interest in, well I guess I do have an interest but not one I want to actually TALK ABOUT, if you know what I mean.

I'd RATHER talk about EVERYONE ELSE and what they are downloading, and how fast. Oh yeah, and also how PROUD they are that thay brake routers.

Johnson City, TN
reply to brunoco

Bruno, I'd have to disagree with you.

Unless KAD is actually logging into the router's interface and clicking reboot, it's the router's fault for failing under the traffic.

It's like if you bought a car that is advertised to work with all types of unleaded gas. So you go and put regular unleaded in it and it's fine. Then you put in premium, and the car explodes after 5 minutes. The gas was fine in other cars, so who's fault is it? Not the gas company's, since the gas worked fine for other cars. Not the person who owns the car, because it was advertised to work with that type of gas. It's the car manufacturer's fault, because the car failed under gas it was supposed to work with.


reply to Billy Brethr

said by Billy Brethr:

Over the last few weeks I have identified a problem with my D-Link 614+ router and the P2P software "emule". Apparently, emule uses a relatively new feature called "Kademlia" (or "Kad", for short) that places an unusually high level of "strain" on the router. Kad is a feature of emule, and it is not necessary to have this feature enabled when using emule. However, it is said that having Kad enabled greatly improves the speed and efficiency of P2P downloads when using emule.
You never stated which hardware and firmware versions of the DI-614+ you are using.

Hardware version A has an ARM7 33Mhz Network Processor
Hardware version B has an ARM9 168Mhz Network Processor

If you have the older version A (which has 2 external antennas), I wouldn't be too surprised it chokes under that kind of load.

At any rate, it's always helpful to state what hardware and firmware versions you are running along with your problem report.


reply to Billy Brethr

I am using the DI-614+ Rev. A router (with 2 antennas) and have absolutely no problems with the Kademlia Network included in eMule. My Router handles easily over 700 KAD connections. This was possible by simply changing the Firmware. If you are interested please visit my homepage:
There the conversion of the DI-614+ Rev. A Router into a TrendWare, Eusso or PheeNet Router is described by a simple firmware change and the required firmwares can be downloaded at no cost.


reply to Billy Brethr

Well, I don't know about you guys, but I've been using eMule for quite awhile with a D-Link 604 router, and I've never had a problem. I'm on a 4Mbs connection, and have eMule set up to take full advantage of that fact. I've never had it reset my router. And that's with an average of 60-100 downloads going at once. Kad fully open.


reply to Billy Brethr

UDP resets are a firmware problem.

I have a DI-614+ Rev.A at my office and a DI-514 Rev.C at my home, both suffers from UDP resets every 2 or 3 minutes when using KAD. The processors even became to much hot to touch. When I upgraded DI-614+ rev A to Pheenet firmware my resets gone away instantly. I'd like to have a D-Link firmware, but I can go on with Pheenet.
My home adsl modem, D-Link 500G, was reseting too but I've found instructions on how to limit UDP timeouts and to change simultaneous connections settings. My office modem, a Speedstream 5600, don't have any problems.

Anybody know a solution for DI-514?



reply to Abouter Router

Re: D-Link Routers Won't Work with emule's Kad

Hi there! For a "very high" executive you certainly don't know how to spell the simplest words. SCARY!!!


reply to Billy Brethr

I've Dlink DI-604 and I have no problems with eMule, Shareaza, Ares, WinMX and LimeWire, you just need to forward port/s for them to work.


reply to Bardd

Re: D-Link Routers Won't Work with emule's Kad

Hi there! For a "very high" executive you certainly don't know how to spell the simplest words. SCARY!!!

Give him a break...he already told you he was high!

On a serious note, however, I've worked in many different companies over the years, and I've often found that near-illiterates rise to the level of Director or even VP. Especially in Sales. Fortunately for all of us, that seems to be as high as they can go in publicly-traded company. And even then, these people seem to jump from "VP of company A" to "VP of company B" to "VP of company C," because after a year or two at any one company everyone that works there knows they're an idiot.

My favorites are the ones that explain to you that it's better that they don't really know what the product they're selling does, because that just gets in the way of selling boxes. They usually last a year, tops.

- chas