NAT error uTorrent but Azureus is all green smiles

[funtuva]

I have been using Azureus and got port forwarding setup with the Comtrend CT535 router. Azureus is happy and shows green smiles, and the check port (6881, etc..) test passes OK.

I prefer uTorrent smaller leaner RAM use, but I get NAT error, no matter how I set ports. If I choose the samer port Azureus is happy with 6881, still NAT error. If I randomize port, or use UPnP, the same. I just cannot get rid of that NAT error thing.

Anyone? I can see uTorrent is growing in all tech forums.... must be good.

[abbad0n]

Do you have a software firewall installed on your computer (even if it's Windows one)? UPnP might not be working properly in µTorrent, but correctly in Azureus. Which is why I always manually set my router and software firewalls manually.

[funtuva]

I have XP firewall, just that. Use to have Zone Alarm, and even managed to configure the expert rules needed to have that woreking with Azureus. But no luck with uTorrent.

I just turnet it off and yeah, NAT error dissapeared in uTorrent (speeds vary crazyly), so maybe I should try to reinstall Zone Alarm and configure it with uTorrent. Maybe if I do not use the random port but specify a port and write the expert rules needed that would work.

In your experience does uTorrent work better with random ports or specifying a port?

Additional Posts:

Another thing, if you let XP firewall run and check the UPnP framework as an allowed exception, uTorrent will not complaint and not give the NAT error. Also of course you have to list the ports you want open as exceptions, but seems to work...although I do not know how this affects the overall speed.

Well, I do not get NAT error but >I do not get the Network OK either..... which I suppose is the same as the greem smiley holy grail thing no?

Oh yeah!! definitely.... getting rid of XP firewall is the only way I know of getting the Network ok message! I will experiment with ZA and see. So far I am fine with configuring manually my Comtrend CT535 router and forget about firewalls...

Finally, for this self monologue topic, 2 things do not like about uTorrent: it brings Firefox 1.5 to its knees (slowwww), and uploads speed with uTorrent are great but download speeds are wither slow (2K, 3k) or vary crazyly but never sustain. On a Encarta torrent, idfentical, Azureus was doing 10K and uTorrent 0,2k), with Network OK and green smileys.... so..... hmmm......

EDIT by silverfire: the edit link exists for a reason

[abbad0n]

Might want to just edit your post.

As for settings, try http://azureus.aelitis.com/wiki/index.php/Good_settings

It's for azureus, but the settings work well with µTorrent also.

[funtuva]

Sorry for the editing.... the azureus wiki is useful

In the end is hard to decide, I keep going back and forth uTorrent and Azureus. I suppose after a few days of trial and error I will decide.

[chaosblade]

Advice: Never use the 6881-6889 ports. Every ISP worldwide probably throttles those by now. Try a higher port, anywhere between 10000-65000.

[Alphasee]

Also, make sure that uTorrent isn't using the same port as Azureus while they're open.

The difference in Azureus and utorrent is that Azureus has a Distributed Network of 500k+, whereas utorrent is down pretty low. The more people we get to convert, the more you're going to download from the Distrubuted netowork.

My question remains though: Is there some way we could either read off the Azureus Distributed Network?

[Firon]

There's a lot of BitComet users you can get, though.

And no, it's not possible without ludde implementing it, which is pointless since nolar (Azureus' main dev) said he's moving to the mainline DHT implementation in the near future anyway.

[ColdArmor]

ZoneAlarm works much better than the SP2 Firewall anyways.

[silverfire]

Not that software firewalls are worth anything when you have a decent hardware firewall. Oftentimes the hardware ones cost exactly as much as software ones, too.

[funtuva]

Silverfire, I guess what you are saying is that we do not need a software firewall, no matter how customizable and great we make it, but I hear people with hardware firewalls only, complaint all the time. At least what I hear from people with the Comtrend CT-535 which is the standard DSL router given here in Spain by the Telefonica (the old monopoly phone company, that now owns most of networks in South America and a big chunk of the business in Spain). I suppose yeah, a Cisco router is pretty good, but who can afford one. My opinion is that with a low end router as Comtrend (maybe I am wrong and they are great routers!) , you are better off with something like ZA 4.5

Chaosblade, is good advice to avoid the ubiquotous (arrrgggg) 6881-6889 ports. I actualle read something here from Master Chi saying to use port 80 (yes port 80!!!, the Internet port!!) and for the sake of it changed it..... my Encarta 2.5gb torrent jumped from 2.5K all nigth to 7K and stays there for the last hour.... however I am not comfortable with this (do not ask me why... Firefox crawls etc..), so I will go to 60000 soemthing and live there

EDIT by silverfire: please do not double post

[silverfire]

You don't need a Cisco router to protect yourself more thoroughly than a software firewall can. I bought a simple 4-port wired router from Linksys for about $30 USD. It has all the features that I'd expect in a NAT box such as port forwarding, DHCP, and other goodies, but it's nowhere near expensive. Do yourself a favor and buy a router (sometimes labeled as a 'DSL/Cable Router') and uninstall your software firewalls.

[funtuva]

OK, here it is, I just pulled the Comtrend CT-535 DSL router from the drawer and installed it. Forwarded a couple of high ports like 60000 and 60010, disconnected XP firewall and uninstalled ZA 4.5 and all my laborious expert rules. Unistalled Azureus (migth as well, there go my green smiles it took so long to get....). I get the Network OK in uTorrent, in any port I try!! (even if it is not forwarded in the router). I guess I have some work to configure router correctly, like DHCP static (??) but for now, the download speeds are pretty low, I tried 2 different torrents with 100 seeds and all I get is 2K - 3K. Something is not rigth.

[slayers]

Are you limiting your uploads to 80% of your max available?

[eisa01]

Why did you forward more than one port, when µTorrent only needs one?

Just curious.

[funtuva]

Yes, I am limiting the uoloads to 80% (as per Azureus instruction page As http://azureus.aelitis.com/wiki/index.php/Good_settings). I forwarded 2 ports just to see if there was any difference between them...

[caube]

Are you limiting your uploads to 80% of your max available?

where do you set this

[Firon]

Network Options.

[funtuva]

Well, after a while and tweaking everything, I just left the ports at random and UPnP enabled and watched. The NAT error comes and goes, it seems without no apparent reason. If I restart uTorrent, I may get the Network OK or nothing, but many times this just fixes the NAT error message for a while. Then after an hour or so, NAT error comes back, so I restart.

Also I have noticed that the NAT error does not influence much the speed of the download. When a torrent is fast, is fast, with or without the NAT error.

[1c3d0g]

Maybe your router just isn't able to handle the amount of connections BitTorrent requires to operate properly... My theory: perhaps when the connections drop below a certain treshold, the NAT Error message goes away, when that treshold is breached again, you get hosed with NAT Error... :|

[funtuva]

My router is a Comtrend CT-535, I am not sure I know if it can or cannot handle the number of connections needed by uTorrent, but seems a capable router and I have configured as much as I could the parameters by going into 192.168.1.1. etc.

[1c3d0g]

I'm not slamming your router down, I'm just saying that maybe it has trouble handling the amount of connections µTorrent requires...a lot of routers (even some expensive ones) experience stability problems and the like when they're subject to "BitTorrenting". Have you been able to manually forward a port instead of relying on UPnP? If so, did your network speed improve? If not, what happened? :|

[funtuva]

Hey, no problem, I am not in love with my router!! I wish I had a Cisco anyway and that IS a capable router.... although my little comtrend does a good job handling both the wired and wireless connections of my LAN!!

Yes, I was able to manually forward port 6881, and later when I learned about traffic shaping and throttling, I forwarded a higher port, 10000. I experimented with that, and notice no difference in speed than when using UpNP and letting uTorrent choose its port randomly.

It seems to boil down to the fact that some torrents have lots of seeds, and when everyvbody swarming is well tuned, things go well to the max I have got and now expect (70K/s steady), on my 1mbit down 512 up ADSL line. I still wish for the 130K/s and even 300K/s I hear from people... but I can live with anything between 30K and 50K/s, having lived with everything since the 300 bps modems in the 80's to now....

I also experimented with turning off and on XP SP/2 firewall and even twidling Zone Alarm 6 to a working point with the ports manually forwarded. Definitely turning off XP firewall gets kills the NAT error on the spot, and you can get a workable connection with ZA. But inthe end I have learned to trust my router to do all firewalling and shut down ZA. I am not missing it.

[funtuva]

1c3d0g, by the way thanks to your posts signtaure, we have turned up some CPU time to some of the Berrkeley folks projects.... thanks for spreading the word, it is really a good feeling knowing some cycles are going to useful things..... especially in one of our computers that has now a AMD64 and plenty of power to spare waiting for Longhorn an 64 bit apps

[1c3d0g]

No, thank YOU, for helping out. Everyone appreciates your contribution to the common good! :cool:

Good to hear you killed off ZoneAlarm. When you have a router, it's not necessary to have a software firewall which just eats up your precious CPU cycles anyway. I've been thinking...is your ISP ever known to do traffic shaping? It's possible that they're throttling down your speeds a bit "to maintain network quality" (the most common excuse they use)...if you're able to find out what ports they use for VoIP/NetMeeting/XBox Live etc., you may gain some of that lost speed back. Just my 0.03¢ (damn inflation).