[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: bittorrent port range?



Fulko Hew sita aero wrote:

fedora-test-list-bounces redhat com wrote on 09/14/2006 03:00:10 PM:

G.Wolfe Woodbury wrote:
I could have sworn that I saw a notice of what range of ports
bittorrent wants opened
to optimize performance, but reviewing the archive I can't find
the numbers right now.

Could someone give me a clue of what ports to forward to the
torrent box from my router?

bt can use 6881 - 6999

Since I've had some issues (in the past) regarding running BT at a
respectable data rate even though I have the ports open and the
firewall forwarding...

I'm wondering if some ISPs aren't blocking BT ports now
to prevent RIAA and MPAA 'theft'?

Any comments?


Yep, that's my situation. I don't use BT that often, so I first noticed the "problem" when I tried to download the FC6t2 ISO. I initially thought I had screwed up my firewall configuration and almost drove myself nuts trying to debug it.

What I finally discovered was that netstat -n showed many ESTABLISHED BT connections (ports around 6881), but my BT client only showed 1 active peer. Looking into that active peer showed that it was running on a non-standard BT port -- don't remember exactly what, but it was +9000. I checked with my ISP and they confirmed they are blocking BT and other P2P protocols.

I changed by BT client to listen on a non-standard port, and still saw the same behavior -- only 1 active peer, using a non-standard port.

Given that a lot ISP's are probably like mine and only use simple port range blocking (as opposed to analyzing the packet data) to clobber BT and the other P2P technologies, maybe it's time for everyone to change their clients to use non-standard ports. The trackers take care of the port changes, so this problem is already solved in the BT protocol. The hardcore P2P users are already doing this -- some are even using encrypting BT clients to avoid attempts at data analysis -- and those are probably the users most likely to draw an RIAA/MPAA nastygram.

I see no problems in using this technique to avoid the blocking. It gets releases out to a wider audience (as opposed to those who have BT blocked and simply give up), which gets more hands/eyes on using/testing the releases that the ISP's will eventually use to provide us with their "services" (or blocking thereof).

Andrew


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]