I'm pretty sure i know the answer to my question, i just want to ask to see if there is any plan to get around this problem in the future..

I have multiple computers crunching numbers for seti@home. I have noticed tonight that only one of them is able to upload the results, it happens to be the one that is set as the DMZ host on my "router". All others cannot upload wich i can see why. Is there any way to get around this, or any plans for other options to upload results?? Maybe a manual web based upload site?

I have a few old dual processor P3 servers that i use to store important data (w/ the raid 5 setup) but most of the time they just sit there running and i would like to be able to contribute to this project or any other projects using boinc, but it is hard to do so when i can only have one machine at a time able to upload results.

Any input on this is appreciated.

Are you sure the problem is at your end?

For the last 29 hours, SETI's communications bandwidth has been stuck at absolute maximum download rate. When this happens, uploads fail for everyone (I have 193 queued), because BOINC doesn't have adequate back-off and load balancing facilities.

The SETI problem is being caused because they can't distibute a new science application - Astropulse_v5 5.03 - quickly enough. Most tasks are failing with a download error -200 on the executable file. Yet BOINC immediately tries again, gets another task, clogs the available bandwidth with the associated 8MB datafile, and fails again on the absent .exe file. Tasks which should take 3 days are being recycled after 5 minutes.

The only available tool that BOINC has to limit this runaway bandwidth consumption is the daily quota. But at SETI, this has been set at 100/day to suit the much shorter (and less data-intensive) multibeam tasks.

Quota, like other BOINC parameters, needs to be moved to the application level, instead of the project level.

thanks for that interesting piece of info. The machine that i said could upload has only successfully uploaded one "task" so i guess it prob. is what your talking about. Guess I'll keep crunching. Thanks :)