<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Tips to increase BitTorrent download speeds</title>
	<atom:link href="http://filesharefreak.com/2007/11/13/tips-to-increase-bittorrent-download-speeds/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://filesharefreak.com/2007/11/13/tips-to-increase-bittorrent-download-speeds/</link>
	<description>THE source for BitTorrent &#38; P2P Tips, Tricks and Info.</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 18:31:32 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Sha</title>
		<link>http://filesharefreak.com/2007/11/13/tips-to-increase-bittorrent-download-speeds/#comment-456</link>
		<dc:creator>Sha</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 20:35:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://filesharefreak.com/wordpress/2007/11/13/tips-to-increase-bittorrent-download-speeds/#comment-456</guid>
		<description>eEye Digital Security's BIOT will also adjust concurrent TCP connections without all the patch confusion. Check it out           http://research.eeye.com/html//tools/RT20060808-1.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>eEye Digital Security&#8217;s BIOT will also adjust concurrent TCP connections without all the patch confusion. Check it out           <a href="http://research.eeye.com/html//tools/RT20060808-1.html" rel="nofollow">http://research.eeye.com/html//tools/RT20060808-1.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rick</title>
		<link>http://filesharefreak.com/2007/11/13/tips-to-increase-bittorrent-download-speeds/#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator>Rick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jan 2008 15:47:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://filesharefreak.com/wordpress/2007/11/13/tips-to-increase-bittorrent-download-speeds/#comment-9</guid>
		<description>Where did you get the idea that Q940646 is already patched?  Just because the problem it corrects deals with throughput?  That's a bit of a leap, but I'm open to the possibility, however unlikely it is that MS reversed their years-long position on this suddenly for a single version of the file.

It's moot anyway, since the version released in January fixes a very important security flaw. It's not like you really have a choice to stay with other versions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Where did you get the idea that Q940646 is already patched?  Just because the problem it corrects deals with throughput?  That&#8217;s a bit of a leap, but I&#8217;m open to the possibility, however unlikely it is that MS reversed their years-long position on this suddenly for a single version of the file.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s moot anyway, since the version released in January fixes a very important security flaw. It&#8217;s not like you really have a choice to stay with other versions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
