P2P-Zone - View Single Post - port blocking, throttling, and scrambling

db_ · 17-07-02, 07:44 AM

Hi.

People can run whatever port they like, it makes no difference to the operation of the client on the network. If every user on the Kazoo network changed their listening port to a random one, it wouldn't change a thing regarding how the network operates (as far as I'm aware). It'd simply make it more difficult for an ISP to run filters based on ports, there ain't a common port this way.

I use 32200 for WinMX currently, simply refers to the current version number and helps avoid any complications during transfers caused by any common port filters in place anywhere on the network connection between me and whoever. There's no need for me to advertise or do anything special in order to operate using a different port other than to manually change it myself.

If I'm a primary here's what happens...

I start WinMX, it contacts the cache
me:4363 contacts cache:7720

cache:7720 gives me IP: port of a OtherPrimary:6699

me:4224 connects into OtherPrimary:6699
(I'm online with the network now)

Some other user, a secondary (SC) user contacts the cache for a Primary to connect into, the cache responds to the secondary user with it's cached IP:Port of my machine...

SC:4256 contacts Cache:7701
Cache:7701 replys to SC:4256
SC:2432 connects into me:32200

I'm sharing files on the network. A remote user sends out a search request, it hits my Primary (me), I reply with the information to the user requesting results with the file details (name, size, type, etc), my IP, and my listening port to connect into.

The remote user double-clicks the search result, the information contained within that search result directs the user to connect into my IP:Port, and the transfer starts (all going well).

That's it really, changing ports doesn't change anything regarding how connections are made within the network (afaik). It just randomizes the ports that the application uses, meaning an ISP can't place a simple filter on any specifc port number, it wouldn't do anything.

It's important each users port remains static, as many users have routers that need to forward incoming packets addressed to specific ports to the appropriate machine. So, upon installation of the client, it'd be preferable if the port was chosen at that point, from there on the router can be configured according to the port chosen during installation. Any user that can't handle port forwarding would chose the easy option of operating the client in the 'firewalled' mode that doesn't require any static listening ports to be defined or configured. I'm not gonna go into the 'firewalled' way of things, I'll just say it's no substitute for static listening ports and cannot be used unanimously.

enough for now.

dB.

17-07-02, 07:44 AM	#22
db_ Registered User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: underground Posts: 9	Hi. People can run whatever port they like, it makes no difference to the operation of the client on the network. If every user on the Kazoo network changed their listening port to a random one, it wouldn't change a thing regarding how the network operates (as far as I'm aware). It'd simply make it more difficult for an ISP to run filters based on ports, there ain't a common port this way. I use 32200 for WinMX currently, simply refers to the current version number and helps avoid any complications during transfers caused by any common port filters in place anywhere on the network connection between me and whoever. There's no need for me to advertise or do anything special in order to operate using a different port other than to manually change it myself. If I'm a primary here's what happens... I start WinMX, it contacts the cache me:4363 contacts cache:7720 cache:7720 gives me IP: port of a OtherPrimary:6699 me:4224 connects into OtherPrimary:6699 (I'm online with the network now) Some other user, a secondary (SC) user contacts the cache for a Primary to connect into, the cache responds to the secondary user with it's cached IP:Port of my machine... SC:4256 contacts Cache:7701 Cache:7701 replys to SC:4256 SC:2432 connects into me:32200 I'm sharing files on the network. A remote user sends out a search request, it hits my Primary (me), I reply with the information to the user requesting results with the file details (name, size, type, etc), my IP, and my listening port to connect into. The remote user double-clicks the search result, the information contained within that search result directs the user to connect into my IP:Port, and the transfer starts (all going well). That's it really, changing ports doesn't change anything regarding how connections are made within the network (afaik). It just randomizes the ports that the application uses, meaning an ISP can't place a simple filter on any specifc port number, it wouldn't do anything. It's important each users port remains static, as many users have routers that need to forward incoming packets addressed to specific ports to the appropriate machine. So, upon installation of the client, it'd be preferable if the port was chosen at that point, from there on the router can be configured according to the port chosen during installation. Any user that can't handle port forwarding would chose the easy option of operating the client in the 'firewalled' mode that doesn't require any static listening ports to be defined or configured. I'm not gonna go into the 'firewalled' way of things, I'll just say it's no substitute for static listening ports and cannot be used unanimously. enough for now. dB.