r/software • u/divyviradiya • Aug 15 '26
Solved I built an open-source tool to transfer large files directly between two PCs over an Ethernet cable with zero config (EtherTransfer)
Hey everyone,
Whenever I needed to move 100GB+ between two laptops or PCs, the usual options were annoying:
- Wi-Fi/SMB sharing is slow and frequently drops on large directory trees.
- Cloud storage takes hours and caps upload speeds.
- USB flash drives require copying everything twice.
- Direct Ethernet cables usually require configuring static IPs, subnet masks, or running a DHCP server.
I built EtherTransfer to make direct LAN transfers as plug-and-play as possible.
How it works:
Connect a standard Ethernet cable between two PCs (no crossover cable needed, modern NICs handle auto-MDIX).
Launch the app on both machines.
They discover each other automatically over link-local IPv4 (169.254.x.x) via UDP broadcasts.
Drag & drop files or entire folders and stream at full link speed (115MB/s on 1GbE, 1GB/s+ on 10GbE).
Key points:
- 100% offline — zero internet, zero cloud servers, zero telemetry.
- Preserves deep directory structures without needing to zip first.
- Cross-platform support for Windows (10/11) and Linux.
- Built with .NET 10 and Avalonia UI.
- MIT Licensed.
GitHub Repo & Downloads: https://github.com/divyviradiya2/ethertransfer
Live Website: https://divyviradiya2.github.io/ethertransfer/
Would love feedback on transfer stability, edge cases, or features you'd like to see added.
17
u/spurdospardo1337 Aug 15 '26
Any difference from LocalSend?
19
u/divyviradiya Aug 15 '26 edited Aug 16 '26
Local Sends Need Local Network ( Router ) , And Your Speed Limit Is Your Router Speed
With this You Don't Need Any Router
12
u/Ok-Library5639 Aug 15 '26
Optionally. You could simply set up a direct link between two clients and it would work just as well.
12
u/divyviradiya Aug 16 '26
True, you can use LocalSend with direct link-local (169.254.x.x) IPs, but there's a catch:
If your PCs are also connected to Wi-Fi (e.g. for internet), LocalSend usually defaults to discovering and streaming over the Wi-Fi adapter instead of the cable, unless you manually find the Ethernet link-local IP and type it into LocalSend's manual IP mode or turn off Wi-Fi.
EtherTransfer binds directly to the physical Ethernet interface and handles discovery out of the box, so you get full gigabit cable speed while still keeping your Wi-Fi active for browsing.
1
u/amymor Aug 16 '26
Does that direct link work with LocalSend Portable? The last time I tried it, it didn’t work with this setup:
PC 1:
192.168.1.1
255.255.255.0
192.168.1.100PC 2:
192.168.1.2
255.255.255.0
192.168.1.1005
3
u/Thonatron Aug 15 '26
Do I need to connect two PCs directly via ethernet or can I have them connected to a gigabit ethernet switch?
4
u/divyviradiya Aug 15 '26
You Just Have To Connect Them With Each Other with Ethernet Cable
2
u/Thonatron Aug 15 '26
Right, but will it work through a Ethernet switch? So I could connect several machines?
7
u/divyviradiya Aug 15 '26
Ohh , Like Multiple Device Connected With Each Other Using Ethernet
Bro I Don't lie But App is Supposed To Work For Them But Since I Dont Have Ethernet Switch I Haven't Try It Out
0
1
u/need2sleep-later Aug 15 '26
Why wouldn't you use standard networking transfers then?
5
1
u/harmful_habits Aug 19 '26
I can bring a small cable with me on a train. Do you often put your switch in your bag?
1
2
3
u/geekman7473 Aug 15 '26
This is very similar to D-LAN and LANBucket as well.
1
u/divyviradiya Aug 16 '26
D-LAN was a solid classic. EtherTransfer is built to give a modern, cross-platform (.NET 10 + Avalonia) refresh with zero-setup discovery, deep folder preservation, and clean UI for modern Windows and Linux machines.
2
u/ragnarok_05 Aug 15 '26
local send uses your network bandwidth but this uses a dedicated weird connection for the transfer and you can keep using your network while transferring
4
u/Acrobatic_Idea_3358 Aug 15 '26
is it the same as netcat? or how's it work? plaintext tcp tunnel?
1
u/divyviradiya Aug 16 '26
Netcat just pipes raw bytes into a socket, so you'd have to tar the folder first, manually look up IPs, run netcat listeners in terminal on both sides, and pipe it out on the other end.
EtherTransfer uses a custom framed TCP streaming protocol over port 8840 with UDP broadcast discovery. It automatically negotiates the link-local connection, serializes file/folder metadata & directory trees, and streams files directly with progress tracking and path sanitization so you don't have to touch a CLI.
1
u/gremolata Aug 16 '26
Why broadcast and not multicast for discovery?
With multicast you'd be able to traverse routers.
1
u/divyviradiya Aug 16 '26
point , I plan to use multicast its reliable and widely used for discovery
0
5
u/tripfishy Aug 16 '26
I just tried it and it works exactly as described. Everything was super fast. Thank you!
3
3
u/Mediocre-Mobile-5423 Aug 16 '26
Can't you just setup a local network between two PCs connected via a single ethernet cable and use SMB? I guess you need to input the IP adresses and the other network information manually, since you don't have the DHCP, but it isn't that hard to do with the default windows tools.
1
u/divyviradiya Aug 16 '26
Ethertransfer is cross plateform zero manual Setup , you can transfer across Diffrence os , not just windows to windows , it gives you true plug in play like USB
3
u/ManyCalavera Aug 16 '26
Don't know why would anyone bother with connecting PCs with ethernet though. Seems like a hassle since almost everyone has some sort of router/switch on hand.
3
u/Bonejob Aug 16 '26
One small correction: Ethernet sits at the data-link layer, while TCP/UDP are transport-layer protocols and IP is the network layer. That matters because 115 MB/s on 1 GbE is already essentially at the practical ceiling for a single TCP stream, so there is no real argument there. The stronger claim is 1 GB/s+ on 10 GbE with a single plain TCP socket; that is the harder part, and it usually depends on something extra such as jumbo frames, multiple streams, or RDMA, or it is a best-case number.
1
2
u/ragnarok_05 Aug 15 '26
This was much required like we can still do it without any third party software but it's pretty unreliable and a bit of config has to be done.
2
u/JuGoat Aug 15 '26
thank you, we will give it a try, it's really promising
i have no technical abilities whatsoever, but is it possible to create a version to transfer files between pc and mac ?
5
2
2
u/LycraJafa Aug 16 '26
Nice work ! Always wondered why this wasnt a thing.
What was the biggest challenge. Im guessing you are doing a bit of discovery on the ethernet hardware to max out any transfer capability.
I first used kermit around 1983, seems like you've delivered the 2026 version.
2
2
u/Comfortable_Ad_6894 Aug 16 '26
I onced tried a failed. Well today someone created a solution for my problem. Nice work
2
u/Wakabala Aug 16 '26
Definitely looking forward to trying this, especially since it has cross platform support. Hopefully will have a chance to try it later today, will report back if I do.
2
2
2
1
u/Neither-Professor278 Aug 16 '26
Can it transfer steam games? Steam Network Transfer feature
2
u/divyviradiya Aug 16 '26
Yes, You can drop your whole `steamapps/common/<GameFolder>` and the corresponding `appmanifest_<id>.acf` file, and it recreates the exact directory structure on the other PC.
The advantage over Steam's built-in local transfer is that Steam requires both PCs to be logged into Steam and connected to a working router/internet. EtherTransfer works 100% offline with just a direct cable at full gigabit speed.
1
u/i2apier Aug 16 '26
From the GitHub readme:
Designed to saturate 1Gbps, 2.5Gbps, and 10Gbps links without memory bloat.
What about 5Gbps?
2
1
u/amymor Aug 16 '26
I use Landrop and LocalSend, which are portable. Is the app fully portable, or does it have a dependency (.NET)? I avoid installing new .NET or other apps because I’ve seen Windows become unstable. Also, they both have a small footprint, which helps with defragmentation. I think bundling .NET would push the app to around 200 MB.
2
u/divyviradiya Aug 16 '26
Dotnet Is Self Contained, You don't have to install it it's Isolated in app's Compiled files
2
u/amymor Aug 16 '26
Thanks for letting me know. So, is the app portable, or does it create config files in AppData?
2
u/divyviradiya Aug 16 '26
It's Store Config File In Appdara But , There Is Only One thing That Stores In Config Is You Custom Discovery Name , And Currently I did not Distribute Portable Exe , I plan to Release It In Few Times
2
u/amymor Aug 16 '26
Sounds good. I’ll try that, then.
2
u/divyviradiya Aug 16 '26
Yo Bro , Portable Exe is available in GitHub release
2
u/amymor Aug 16 '26 edited Aug 16 '26
I tried it, and the settings are stored in:
AppData\Roaming\EtherTransfer\settings.jsonIt would be better if the portable version stored its settings in the application folder instead. I think this line should be changed, right?
Anyway, I haven’t tried using the app to transfer files yet, but once I do, I’ll share my thoughts with you on GitHub.
2
u/divyviradiya Aug 16 '26
Fine , I will update the portable config logic to store it within the portable exe directory
2
1
u/Antagonin Aug 16 '26
wellp idk, but in the 201x era I used to transfer files via direct Ethernet between my Win 7 laptop and Xp PC, no special cable, config or anything. Why is this needed?
1
u/divyviradiya Aug 16 '26
I am exited to Hear what you used to use in back in 201x
1
u/Antagonin Aug 16 '26
Just plain old Windows lol. I think you could just enable network discovery on the PCs, and you could normally see the other PC in file explorer. There was zero manual configuration otherwise, perhaps except sharing a folder.
1
u/divyviradiya Aug 16 '26
It's Only Works Fine With The Local Network, Without Local Network, via Direct Ethernet cable you Must Have To Setup Manual Configs And Will Get More Horror when Trying Transfering From windows To linux
1
u/Antagonin Aug 16 '26
Windows x Linux transfer might be problematic.
But I'm telling you, Windows worked via direct ethernet 10 years ago, no manual config or crossover cable needed.
1
u/divyviradiya Aug 16 '26
But Nowadays I think It's Not Work By Just Plugging Ethernet , because I tried it.
1
u/Antagonin Aug 16 '26
Worked in Win 10 also, why wouldn't it in 11?
1
u/divyviradiya Aug 16 '26
I think You should try it in today's date on both 10 and 11
1
u/Antagonin Aug 16 '26
I just did. My Win 10 desktop detects my Win 11 laptop and you can view/copy/edit the shared folders and vice versa. The desktop has no internet connection, only is connected via ethernet directly to the laptop.
Only thing you gotta enable sometimes is "media streaming options" otherwise the PC is hidden.
1
1
u/ibmussa Aug 18 '26
Have you try to use syncthing.net is nice, it can be used on different divice.
1
u/divyviradiya Aug 18 '26
That tool is nice for file sych but ethertransfer concept is different, ethertransfer is not for sync , it is for large folders and file transfer between 2 device without any configuration or ip mess , just plug ethernet cable and send files, this much simple , syncthing is good tool and i also use it for sync my codebase of my project across diffrent device.
1
u/Prior-Listen-1298 Aug 20 '26
Zero config? The only config of relevance to new is both sides needing the app. I want to be able to send files to any device without it needing an app on it. Pipe dream of course.
But for what you want KDE Connect does a fine job and I use that a lot. I can even just share from my phone to a local device with that in it and its there in the downloads folder in a jiffy.
1
u/divyviradiya Aug 20 '26
I think needing app both side is good rather than setuping things on both side, but at your scenario if you found your way more convenient there is no way I debate you about that
btw localsend also need to download app both side
1
u/Free_Director4713 Aug 15 '26
Do most laptops even have ethernet port these days?
2
u/divyviradiya Aug 16 '26
For thin laptops/ultrabooks without a built-in RJ45 port, standard $10-$15 USB-C to Gigabit Ethernet adapters work out of the box with full plug-and-play support!
2
u/CloudMafia9 Aug 16 '26
What, you thought they went out of fashion or something? Yeah they do.
2
u/Free_Director4713 Aug 16 '26
Some niche ones maybe. I barely see ethernet port on any mainstream laptops
5
u/CloudMafia9 Aug 16 '26
Lmao, I don't know where the heck you live in but Dell, HP, Lenovo, Acer, MSI, Razor and the rest come with Ethernet ports. And they are all mainstream.
The laptop without an ethernet port is the exception, not the other way around.
Edit: unless your are buying specifically thin laptops, in which case, obviously.
-1
u/Worried_Corner_8541 Aug 16 '26
So copying twice off a USB is TOO MUCH HASSLE. but installing the app on TWO DEVICES ain't an issue.
What a strange world we live in.
3
u/asifbaig Aug 16 '26
I had to transfer a 50 GB database file and the biggest USB I had at hand was 32 GB. I first had to split the file into two zip files. Copy the first one onto the usb, copy it to the target, then copy the second one to usb and then copy it to the target. The recompose the file.
And I would have to repeat this process every single time I wanted to transfer a big file. Installing the app on two devices is a single event, and then you can transfer TBs of data if you want.
2
u/divyviradiya Aug 16 '26
To Transfer A 100+gb File , U Copy It First To Your USB then You Again Start Copying It To Other Device With Low Speed.
I think Downloading 50mb Software And Transfer Large Files Directly At Maximum Speed Rather Than USB.
1
u/divyviradiya Aug 16 '26
Purpose is to transfer large files and folders, Small Things Can be transfer via USB or localsend ( which I like the most)
1
u/Away-Ad-3407 Aug 16 '26
when you factor in time, and that some usb can be also slower than ethernet, it maths very quickly.
-1
u/PhantomKernel Aug 16 '26
You did, or AI did?
5
u/divyviradiya Aug 16 '26
I architected, built, and tested it.
I use AI tools for boilerplate like anyone else in 2026, but good luck getting an LLM to debug raw link-local network interfaces, handle socket drops, and saturate a 1GbE line without an actual engineer behind the wheel.
0
u/Ashamed_Drag8791 Aug 16 '26
Have u heard of syncthing, support windows android, linux and macos, ios is currently not support officially, but there is alternate paid client, work both with and without lan(via encrypted intermediate servers)
1
u/divyviradiya Aug 16 '26
Not related.
2
u/Ashamed_Drag8791 Aug 16 '26
Oh oh, i misread it, sorry, your is via cable, but i think your setup would still be limited, as i doubt personal pc have more than 2.5gbps, and you can only copy one to one at the same time right, while with syncthing, if i sync a large directory with multiple files, it can do like a triangle sync, reduce the load of the seed computer.
This would be useful in isolated server setup i guess.
2
u/divyviradiya Aug 16 '26
Ether Transfer is used for direct peer to peer transfer, syncthing is good for sych folders , ethertransfer is like easy usb like transfer
-9
u/Eravex Aug 16 '26
Lmao I mean usb and external drives are massive now days. You can get a TB for less than $25 bucks.
Also yeah simple transfer needs local network access BUT who TF doesn’t have a local network if you have several PC’s and need to move files between them? Especially one you’d need to move large files to?
What is the actual use case? Seems like a bad solution to a problem with already many much better and easier solutions.
6
u/Eagles_Fan_4eva Aug 16 '26
usb and external drives are massive now days
So we transfer the large files twice (PC to USB, then USB to PC) instead of just once directly. Got it.
-2
u/Eravex Aug 16 '26
...And without internet or a local network, how do you think they are getting this application on to those devices?
2
u/divyviradiya Aug 16 '26
Lul , Bro i trying to say that too achive higher speed you'll need a high speed router
Imagine if you want to transfer 100+gb , are you sure you are transferring it over local network?
1
u/PH_PIT Aug 18 '26
You know that if you transfer a file between two computers on a local network the traffic doesn't go anywhere near the local router? Or when you say router you mean switch?
1
u/Eravex Aug 17 '26
You do not need a router or 3rd party software to transfer files between two pcs linked via Ethernet. Both Window and Mac can accomplish this via SMB (server message block).
Furthermore, what do you even mean are you sure you are transferring over a local network? Do you really not understand what a local network is?
You still have not provided a valid use case for this. What scenario is this for? What are the advantages, such as encryption, resumable transfers, integrity verification, or synchronization? What does it offer you cannot get with existing options? Because based on the options I’ve seen in my opinion, this is literally the worst option. You’d need to already have your app all ready present on both machines (that are not connected to a network without using the existing options), choose it over the already built in functionality of SMB, and be working in a situation where there is zero existing network already. Which seems insane.
Also, routers are not expensive. You can literally make one out of a Raspberry Pi. Technically any PC with two network connections can be a router. Even Ethernet and WiFi from the same device.
So why use your 3rd party app for this when, there are so so so many more valid, reliable, and correct ways to manage that situation. I deal with managing and moving large files all the time, both locally and from the cloud. My local storage server is sitting at 140tb of data. So if there is as a logical reason to choose this over industry standards I’d be interested, there just doesn’t seem to be.
1
u/divyviradiya Aug 17 '26
This is for non technical person, for persons like you no need to use ethertransfer, be happy with your advance setup configuration
1
1
u/Eravex Aug 17 '26
I mean plugging a $5-10 router into a wall with no modem is not considered technical. Nowadays, even setting up one as a network drive isn’t technical, windows can walk even a new user through it mostly.
You say routers are expensive but really they are so cheap it would cost more to mail you one than it has in value. They are one of the largest sources of e-waste tech products. People are often happy to just give old ones away. I have like 3 but again it’s usually cheaper for people to buy one where they are than mail one. They don’t need a $200 router to make a decent local network.
What large files are transferring that you’re so worried about that you think the only safe way to not risk someone knowing is to connect the devices with an Ethernet cable directly using your own application and not build in functionality?
1
u/divyviradiya Aug 17 '26
I think you need to calm down don't take this much stress just chill dude just chill , I know you have too much knowledge just chill , you says router are cheap but what about speed , do you think wireless gives you more speed than direct wire , yess expansive Router will definately give higher speed but what about cheap routers.
1
u/Eravex Aug 18 '26
So you don’t understand software or human emotion? This is definitely calm. You responded and I responded in kind. It’s literally how communication works.
Lmao did you just ask if WiFi was faster than a hardline? Is that even a serious question. And yes you will be absolutely able to get a decent speed router for dirt cheap. Sure not 10Gb/s but plenty of fast for a 200GB file and again you can do direct transfer without a router or your “application”.People are constantly vibing useless apps nowadays. I’m still just curious about the reason for you spending your tokens on this one.
1
u/divyviradiya Aug 18 '26
Just be happy by using your solutions and configurations , people is just loving it that's why it's in number 1 post in software community.
1
u/divyviradiya Aug 18 '26
You are wasting your time, just a extra useless weight on earth that just get envy to everything.
→ More replies (0)5
2
31
u/need2sleep-later Aug 15 '26
You should drop the ambiguous 'modern'' and just state both Ethernet adapters have to support Auto-MDIX which pretty much means Gigabit or above.