Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Getting started with Dat: two things I find confusing #161

Open
rauschma opened this issue Aug 27, 2019 · 5 comments
Open

Getting started with Dat: two things I find confusing #161

rauschma opened this issue Aug 27, 2019 · 5 comments

Comments

@rauschma
Copy link

rauschma commented Aug 27, 2019

  • Hashbase only worked after I opened port 3282 on my router’s firewall. Is this really necessary? I couldn’t find anything in the docs regarding ports, only a mention of Dat Doctor.
    • If opening this port is necessary: does Dat support UPnP or PCP? Then it could open and close that port itself, as/when necessary.
  • With the port open, when I run Dat Doctor’s basic test, it gets stuck at “Checking Dat Public Connections via UTP”. What does that mean?
    • It’s not clear to me what “ERROR: symmetric nat” means, either.

This is the full output:

Welcome to Dat Doctor!

Software Info:
  darwin x64
  Node v12.8.0
  Dat Doctor v2.1.2
  dat v13.13.1

Running Basic Tests (Checks your Dat installation and network setup)

✖ Who am I?
  The default Dat port (3282) in use, using random port.
  This may impact Dat's connectivity if you have a firewall.
  ERROR: symmetric nat
✔ Loaded native modules
✔ Resolved Dat Doctor Server
✔ Successful data transfer with Dat Doctor via TCP
⠹ Checking Dat Public Connections via UTP

Other than that: I love how easy it is to get started with Dat!

@pfrazee
Copy link
Contributor

pfrazee commented Aug 27, 2019

👋 Hey @rauschma. Answering inline:

Hashbase only worked after I opened port 3282 on my router’s firewall. Is this really necessary?

Hopefully not. We're wrapping up dat 2.0 right now which includes a rewrite of the connections code. The new hole-punching (which opens a p2p connection through the firewall/NAT) has been more reliable, so hopefully the answer will be- no, not necessary.

If opening this port is necessary: does Dat support UPnP or PCP? Then it could open and close that port itself, as/when necessary.

We have UPnP try to open a port in Beaker thanks to a PR, but I haven't dug deeply into it to make sure it's the best implementation (or that it's making a difference). I've been waiting for dat 2 before I dig deeper. AFAIK other dat clients aren't using UPnP yet but they could.

With the port open, when I run Dat Doctor’s basic test, it gets stuck at “Checking Dat Public Connections via UTP”. What does that mean?

Not sure - maybe it's stalling out because it's failing to make a connection. (UTP is an alternative to TCP.)

It’s not clear to me what “ERROR: symmetric nat” means, either.

Probably shouldn't be an "error" but a "symmetric nat" is a kind of router configuration that's uniquely difficult to hole-punch. I'm going to pass it to @mafintosh to see if he has thoughts on whether UPnP or some other mechanism could help here.

@mafintosh
Copy link
Contributor

Yuh symmetric nats are hard to hole punch as @pfrazee mention. How about we ping you back here in a week or so to try to run this on Dat 2.0?

@rauschma
Copy link
Author

Thanks @pfrazee & @mafintosh!

How about we ping you back here in a week or so to try to run this on Dat 2.0?

Good plan!

I’m using a Fritz!Box, the same router as almost everyone in Germany, so it’d be great if it worked automatically. Fingers crossed!

For Dat Doctor: would it make sense to have some kind of timeout plus an informative message that suggests a fix. It could also be a URL pointing to further troubleshooting material.

@RangerMauve
Copy link
Collaborator

So far these are the docs we have for help with troubleshooting. https://docs.datproject.org/docs/troubleshooting

If you have time, I'd be happy to review a PR that links to these docs in dat-doctor.

Also if you have ideas for stuff that should be added in the docs. 😁

@rauschma
Copy link
Author

Also if you have ideas for stuff that should be added in the docs.

The answers to my questions I got in this thread were very helpful.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants