Jump to content

Connecting to peers problem


JMJimmy

Recommended Posts

Details:

Problems:

- Torrents continually timeout when announcing unless the trackers are individually updated manually (this happens after adding the torrent and after it's been in operation for a while they will timeout again unless I update manually, happens with all trackers I've tested (~15 of them)

- Connecting to peers after announce is problematic at best, of 15-20k seeds I might be able to see less than 10 and connect to 1 or 2.

ISP: Teksavvy (Bell Canada wholesaler). They do not block/throttle P2P, and Tek is currently testing their own tracker to see if http://bittorrent.org/beps/bep_0022.html has any benefits

Connection: VDSL 26mbps down, 11mbps up, directly wired

System: Win8.1, no anti-X software, no firewall (win firewall disabled)

Software: 3.3.1 build 30017 (I know there is a new build, I have it installed on another system and it shows the same issue. This problem has been ongoing since upgrading to 3.2 on a Win7 system), randomized port, UPnP enabled (both in router & utorrent) with no port forwarding rules.

OK, so here's what I've done so far:

Gone through this in detail: http://forum.utorrent.com/viewtopic.php?id=15992

Reset to default settings for 6+ months

Ran MLAB test to confirm ISP neutrality

Lowered my settings to the conservative level for a 25/10mbps connection (lower than those set by the speed guide) and split the conservative number between two systems running utorrent (each gets 250 global connections etc)

Searched extensively in these forums

Checked non-utorrent forms for similar problems (very few that couldn't be attributed to stupid user syndrome)

Tried multiple modems/routers + firmware versions for those modems/routers, cables/systems/OS'

Waited months through multiple builds for the problem to be resolved

So why do announces almost always fail unless done manually?

Edit: Once announce completes my speeds are top notch, so it's not a speed issue, just a announce issue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am also having a similar problem :( I have been using utorrent for almost three years and this is the first time I'm experiencing this problem :( when I try to download utorrent it gets stuck on "connecting to Peers" and doesnt download. Also tried installing Bittorrent still doesnt work. please help !!!

Thnks.

TRACKERS:

Name Status Update In Seeds Peers Downloaded

[DHT] working 6m 21s 0 0 0

[Local Peer Discovery] working 0 2 0

[Peer Exchange] working 0 5 0

http://exodus.desync.com:6969/announce offline (timed out) 7m 37s 0 0 0

udp://exodus.desync.com:6969/announce Connection timed out. 6m 45s 0 0 0

udp://tracker.1337x.org:80/announce No such host is known. 3m 44s 0 0 0

udp://tracker.openbittorrent.com:80/announce Connection timed out. 5m 43s 0 0 0

udp://tracker.yify-torrents.com/announce Connection timed out. 6m 46s 0 0 0

Win 7

Firewall disabled

Utorrent version 3.4 build (30378)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

udp://tracker.1337x.org:80/announce No such host is known. 3m 44s 0 0 0

Is dead and has been for a while

The timeouts are indicative of a firewall (possibly on your router) blocking or ISP blocking of UPD on port 6969 through their systems.

As mentioned in my original post, UPnP is enabled (and I can confirm it works as I've been playing a lot of GFWL lately) and I do not run a software firewall. Also, no port rules exist on my router as I found enabling that functionality did screw up UPnP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely nothing to do with UPnP or port forwarding or a software firewall on your machine.

Most domestic routers have a firewall built into the firmware, theoretically this should be disabled for ports that are forwarded but is not always the case, and the packet inspection that the router firewall is performing, often causes problems with UDP traffic, because unlike TCP, UDP has no error control mechanism for packet delivery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely nothing to do with UPnP or port forwarding or a software firewall on your machine.

Most domestic routers have a firewall built into the firmware, theoretically this should be disabled for ports that are forwarded but is not always the case, and the packet inspection that the router firewall is performing, often causes problems with UDP traffic, because unlike TCP, UDP has no error control mechanism for packet delivery.

Yes, I'm very familiar with SPI firewalls and that's what UPnP does, it dynamically opens/closes ports upon request. Disabling SPI firewalls is a really bad idea as they block a lot of random probing/garbage incoming from all over. That's why UPnP/Port forwarding/etc exist. As to TCP vs UDP error correction, that shouldn't be an issue on an interleaved connection as the error correction is handled at the DSLAM before it's transmitted to the modem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disabling SPI firewalls is a really bad idea as they block a lot of random probing/garbage incoming from all over. That's why UPnP/Port forwarding/etc exist.

No and no.

Port forwarding was/is a way of overcoming the limitations of IPv4 so that different services can co-exist on a single IP, which is why it also known as "IP masquerading".

NAT-PMP was developed to automate port forwarding when routers came within the purview of the general population rather than only being the preserve of trained and qualified network techs.

UPnP (Universal Plug and Play) was developed as a means of allowing disparate devices to communicate with each other.

Computers inside a NAT router have no real use for software firewalls as infiltration attempts for a non-forwarded port go nowhere, this also makes the router firewall redundant because there is no vulnerable "software" that can be "hooked" into or infected on the router.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disabling SPI firewalls is a really bad idea as they block a lot of random probing/garbage incoming from all over. That's why UPnP/Port forwarding/etc exist.

No and no.

Port forwarding was/is a way of overcoming the limitations of IPv4 so that different services can co-exist on a single IP' date=' which is why it also known as "IP masquerading".

NAT-PMP was developed to automate port forwarding when routers came within the purview of the general population rather than only being the preserve of trained and qualified network techs.

UPnP (Universal Plug and Play) was developed as a means of allowing disparate devices to communicate with each other.

Computers inside a NAT router have no real use for software firewalls as infiltration attempts for a non-forwarded port go nowhere, this also makes the router firewall redundant because there is no vulnerable "software" that can be "hooked" into or infected on the router.[/quote']

UPnP implements the IGD Protocol (NAT-PMP) and through this adds port mapping (aka port forwarding) which includes SPI traversal.

As to the value of SPI, how would you propose dealing with various flood/dos attacks? Also, just because SPI is not dealing with the packets doesn't mean resources are suddenly freed up - NAT will then have to process them, regardless of whether or not they have a place to go. Unlike SPI, NAT will not drop a packet and will respond, inviting further traffic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except that you're handling EVERY packet twice. Short version. If it's not a high-end router, SPI is genuinely useless.

It's only handled twice if it's a legitimate packet, if it's not it's dropped with no further processing. While we can agree to disagree on the value of SPI, I, and just about every other VDSL customer in Canada, do not have the ability to disable it. The custom firmware the ISPs run on the Sagemcom 2864 doesn't have an option for it, nor does it allow bridging without running afoul of the new "digital lock" laws/violating the rental agreement/etc. The only other modems allowed on the network are a Cellpipe (horrid little thing) and a SmartRG (just got "certified", only a handful of indie ISPs have these)

If processing power was an issue there would be indications (excessive heat, issues gaming online while torrenting, other slowdowns) there's none of that. It also doesn't explain why doing a manual updates work 95% of the time while the automated ones timeout 95% of the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As to the value of SPI' date=' how would you propose dealing with various flood/dos attacks? [/quote']

Well, unless you are running an operation that is as well known and approaching half the size of Amazon on your home broadband router, DoS attacks are really not that likely.

Maybe not, depends what dirty tactics the movie studios decide to use next ;) As a gamer I do find some wanna be hackers will try to flood to gain an advantage in game, that or if I piss them off they'll try to get revenge by launching some lame attack. In some situations SPI can really help with that (not all).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...