Talk:Advanced Direct Connect

This is the talk page of a redirect that targets the page:
• Direct Connect (protocol)
Because this page is not frequently watched, present and future discussions, edit requests and requested moves should take place at:
• Talk:Direct Connect (protocol)

This article was nominated for deletion on 2 October 2022. The result of the discussion was merge.

This page was proposed for deletion by Anton.bersh (talk · contribs) on 24 October 2021.

DC++ Derivates

Why is so many DC++ derivates are on this page? These are not individual clients for the ADC network just some mods. In this case we could add all DC++-mods here and this would become a "DC clients" wiki page -- Molnihun (talk) 07:01, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We added a complete list of software that supports the protocol with what exact extensions they have added so that the user can see what they can or cant to do on the adc side --Swetoast (talk) 17:11, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there are scalability information? eDonkey can hold about 1.500.000 users. DC (not ADC) can hold about 20.000 users. How scalable is ADC? 83.246.135.39 (talk) 14:34, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That all depends on the software implementation kinda hard to speculate in --Swetoast (talk) 17:11, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Name

The protocol is simply called "ADC". "Advanced Direct Connect" is a backronym. The original specification clearly states this. 118.209.91.199 (talk) 06:33, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Advanced Direct Connect. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110707083222/http://www.adcportal.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=474 to http://www.adcportal.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=474

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:09, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Before you consider this page for deletion

This protocol is fairly different from the Direct Connect (protocol) as anybody who also has tried to program software interacting with both will be able to confirm. These differences are the main reason why different URLs are used and why most hub softwares (verlihub, ynhub, adch++ or uhub) support either one or the other (the most notable exception being flexhub). HTTP/3 Already provides a clear example where different pages are being kept for significant versions of the protocol. Finally, the dcpp blog linked in most references is not a personal blog but a blog maintained by the developers of DC++ and an authoritative source in most aspects regarding the development of the protocol since they were one of the main impulsors of the change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Klondike (talk • contribs) 01:40, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There you go, removed all the problematic material. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:00, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]