Author Topic: UDP out on port 10255 (Read 3951 times)

~~GnarlySnarly~~ · « **on:** March 29, 2006, 11:42:24 am »

I just checked my firewall traffic on one of my systems, and it has recorded 64MB of outgoing UDP packets from port 10255

That's not my designated room port. and it is in test mode with no chat, and <2 users.

I don't see port 10255 documented for anything. What is it? and why all that traffic?

KM · « **Reply #1 on:** March 29, 2006, 06:17:59 pm »

using which program? you imply only choosing one port and for a room, which would indicate a third party chat server

if that is the case then that's exactly what you should expect - the reason you didn't specify the port to use for UDP is because a random one gets used, because no inbound UDP packets are received only sent out so the port used are irrelevant so no option would be given to set that, the port you set for chat servers is the port to listen on for inbound TCP connections

if that isn't the case... more details?

~~GnarlySnarly~~ · « **Reply #2 on:** March 30, 2006, 05:51:09 am »

Quote from: KM on March 29, 2006, 06:17:59 pm

using which program?

Are you suggesting I would be so lame as to use anything but WCS?

Quote from: KM

you imply only choosing one port and for a room, which would indicate a third party chat server

yes. see above

Quote from: KM

if that is the case then that's exactly what you should expect - the reason you didn't specify the port to use for UDP is because a random one gets used, because no inbound UDP packets are received only sent out so the port used are irrelevant so no option would be given to set that, the port you set for chat servers is the port to listen on for inbound TCP connections

I understand the incoming TCP port for connections.

I was mainly interested in just what the outgoing UDP port and traffic is for. My other system uses the same port 10255 [random?] and I noticed it had over 400MB of traffic on it since startup.

KM · « **Reply #3 on:** March 30, 2006, 05:57:44 pm »

sending channel details to primaries is done via UDP (setting up a TCP connection to each of them would not be practical) - that's all UDP is used for in chat servers, of course in clients search results are returned using it as well, but WCS doesn't care about searches

~~GnarlySnarly~~ · « **Reply #4 on:** March 31, 2006, 12:12:17 pm »

Quote from: KM on March 30, 2006, 05:57:44 pm

sending channel details to primaries is done via UDP (setting up a TCP connection to each of them would not be practical) - that's all UDP is used for in chat servers, of course in clients search results are returned using it as well, but WCS doesn't care about searches

400MB for giving my channel info?

now THAT seems to be a wastge of resources!

my channel aint that big

yet.

KM · « **Reply #5 on:** March 31, 2006, 12:15:35 pm »

depends how long the room has been running for

and of course the length of the channel name/topic (which are the bulk of the UDP packet sent) - it sends about 4 responses a second depending on time of day of course, and each of those contains the room details... a small amount of data does build up after a while in to a large amount of data

~~GnarlySnarly~~ · « **Reply #6 on:** March 31, 2006, 12:50:14 pm »

Quote from: KM on March 31, 2006, 12:15:35 pm

depends how long the room has been running for

and of course the length of the channel name/topic (which are the bulk of the UDP packet sent) - it sends about 4 responses a second depending on time of day of course, and each of those contains the room details... a small amount of data does build up after a while in to a large amount of data

4 times a second? I am lucky if i see 4 new nicks a day.

Well.. not much can be done since its a function of winmx, until further official or rogue development is done. Seems like such a waste.. that equivalent to 100 songs.

I think it could be optimized in certain ways, but not much point discussing it now until some new development effort makes itself known.

I am guessing that running as dialup, with fewer primary connections would reduce that traffic a little then right?

KM · « **Reply #7 on:** March 31, 2006, 01:18:31 pm »

not really, all channel list refreshes (ie. every time someone loads the channel list you have to send out the channel details to them (it does a search just like searching for files, except searching for channels) - dial up mode just reduces the number of primary connections, it will still see (and respond to) all channel list refreshes, it'll just take longer on average to see them causing your listing to be slower, so your channel becomes one of the last listed instead of one of the first

~~GnarlySnarly~~ · « **Reply #8 on:** April 01, 2006, 12:29:20 pm »

Quote from: KM on March 31, 2006, 01:18:31 pm

not really, all channel list refreshes (ie. every time someone loads the channel list you have to send out the channel details to them (it does a search just like searching for files, except searching for channels) - dial up mode just reduces the number of primary connections, it will still see (and respond to) all channel list refreshes, it'll just take longer on average to see them causing your listing to be slower, so your channel becomes one of the last listed instead of one of the first

Is that optimal?

Wouldn't it be better if the primary hub just maintained a complete channel list and propagated changes, with the chatrooms only sending their info once per connect?

academic i guess at this point of winmx development.

KM · « **Reply #9 on:** April 01, 2006, 02:02:06 pm »

naa, you forget that winmx has not changed since it had only a few hundred rooms and many less users... it was designed for what it handled then, and let's face it 1k/s or so of UDP traffic to list the room even now is hardly anything compared to what you use for the primary connection in the first place