Luka1
join:2001-10-30
Index, WA
| reply to justin
Re: tweaktest
Justin,
I just wanted to say thanks. The test is still working, and I am still tweaking.
The test did help me to eliminate a lot of variables, and I finally narrowed my problem down to terrain/foliage... And a couple of simple settings in the connection manager.
(Plus the fact that Sprint has been doing work in this area lately. I hate it when they are doing work, you have no way to know that is happening, you experience problems, and then you run all over the place like a chicken with it's head cut off, trying to figure out what is wrong with YOUR harware or software. LOL)
Anyway, I have gotten it worked out to give me at least ten times the speed of dialup. (After being on dialup for ten years, these speeds seem miraculous. LOL)
And I am glad to see that the suggestion about the blocked ports has been included in the tweaks test area.
I am as happy to have helped, as I am to have been helped.
 |
|
caffeinator
Coming soon to a cup near you..
Premium
join:2005-01-16
Spokane, WA
 ·WebBand
| reply to Luka1
Yeah, I just made a rule allowing both, only outgoing and only to that IP. Blocking all incoming and fragments.
Works good.
-CaFF
--
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - A. Einstein |
|
Luka1
join:2001-10-30
Index, WA
| reply to caffeinator
I just recently put a whole lot of rules on log but do not alert, because I too grew very tired of the popup alerts.
The 4 rules I turned off meant that anything they were blocking before, would now pop up with a question as to whether I wanted to allow it or not.
I guess you could say I was too lazy to read through the log. he he he |
|
NetFixer
Freedom is NOT Free
Premium
join:2004-06-24
Murfreesboro, TN
 ·Vonage
·AT&T Southeast
 ·Cingular Wireless
·AT&T CallVantage
| reply to caffeinator
said by caffeinator  :I still think adding the specific ports used (unless they are random) to the faq entry might help folks. I don't normally limit my browsers to only ports 80 and 443 because I often use them as remote access clients with non-standard ports. For a test, I just changed my firewall to only allow port 80 and 443 access, and the tweak test requested connections on ports 8085 and 8086. That combined with Luka1 's discovery that ports 8085 and 8086 were required would seem to indicate that these are fixed ports.
--
We can never have enough of nature. We need to witness our own limits transgressed, and some life pasturing freely where we never wander.
Test your firewall. |
|
caffeinator
Coming soon to a cup near you..
Premium
join:2005-01-16
Spokane, WA
·WebBand
| reply to Luka1
My firewall dosn't ask, it just allows what I say and drops the rest..popups annoy the crap outa me.
I just went to the log when it failed and saw packets being blocked at the time I did the test..basically the same thing as yours just different approach.
-CaFF
--
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - A. Einstein |
|
Luka1
join:2001-10-30
Index, WA
| reply to fatness
said by fatness :Similar problems reported via the site feedback links usually get an email response from me highlighting that FAQ entry, which mentions Norton and Zone Alarm Pro, and I've yet to get a reply asking "what do I try next?" I don't know if that means ZAP or NIS was causing their problem, or they just didn't reply. ZAP or NIS probably WAS causing the problem, by blocking those ports.
You never got a reply, because they turned off the firewall, did the test, and walked away. (Possibly muttering under their breath about how worthless their firewall was, because it causes so many problems. LOL)
I created a rule allowing those ports for the test IP only. And I turned it off immediately after I was finished testing. |
|
caffeinator
Coming soon to a cup near you..
Premium
join:2005-01-16
Spokane, WA
·WebBand
| reply to fatness
said by fatness :Yeah, it is, but I'm pretty dumb and the link knows as much about the problem as I do. Similar problems reported via the site feedback links usually get an email response from me highlighting that FAQ entry, which mentions Norton and Zone Alarm Pro, and I've yet to get a reply asking "what do I try next?" I don't know if that means ZAP or NIS was causing their problem, or they just didn't reply. lol, you are hardly dumb... 
You can't know what all ungodly configurations peeps might have, but perhaps just a link to this thread might be useful?
If there's anything I can do, let me know.
-CaFF
--
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - A. Einstein |
|
Luka1
join:2001-10-30
Index, WA
| reply to caffeinator
I do thank you for the help.
But I found the problem before I read your response.
I suspect I did so in much the same way you probably did. I just turned off some of my rules, and sat there and waited for the firewall to ask me about some connection trying to be made.
|
|
fatness
subtle
Janitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing
·EarthLink
Host:
Earthlink DSL
TekSavvy
Forum Feature Requ..
Need Site Help?
Rants, Raves, and ..
| reply to caffeinator
said by caffeinator :Saying that certain apps might interfere is kinda vague to my mind. Yeah, it is, but I'm pretty dumb and the link knows as much about the problem as I do.
Similar problems reported via the site feedback links usually get an email response from me highlighting that FAQ entry, which mentions Norton and Zone Alarm Pro, and I've yet to get a reply asking "what do I try next?" I don't know if that means ZAP or NIS was causing their problem, or they just didn't reply.
--
Sure, that'll work.. |
|
caffeinator
Coming soon to a cup near you..
Premium
join:2005-01-16
Spokane, WA
·WebBand
1 edit | reply to Luka1
Well, glad I could be helpful and that you got it working.
One thing I had found out on accident, was that my router was using different MTU and such than my already tweaked Windows settings...might that be part of it?
I'm in Spokane, and frankly I've never heard of Index, WA. 
Might be a local issue there, IDK.
GL mate,
-CaFF |
|
caffeinator
Coming soon to a cup near you..
Premium
join:2005-01-16
Spokane, WA
·WebBand
| reply to Name Game
said by Name Game :said by caffeinator :Nowhere that I could find does it specifically say we have to open those ports to use the test. I see this as a potential problem...and should be clearly marked in the Tool's FAQ if they are to be used for the test IMO. -CaFF Which is why I suggested that if you could become pingable..that usually is an indication it will work for ya. Those firewalls and routers sure are smart these days. I found that out one day when doing this speed test » www.speedtest.net/some do not like that one since it also does it with flash stuff..but it is still my cup of tea. and it stores my previous tests. » www.speedtest.net/ Nice test site, in fact my ISP's parent LLIX has provided entries there..cool.
Odd though, on testing with them, I got horrid times..even though it's my ISP..LOL
In comparison, speakeasy's seattle test is double the speed rate. Odd..although it's probably the ping deal, and that my ISP runs a straight shot to Seattle with TW.
Routing..such a tangled Web...
-CaFF
--
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - A. Einstein |
|
Luka1
join:2001-10-30
Index, WA
| reply to justin
I did get it to work. And after all the help I got here, the least I can do is to leave feedback.
I was already "pingable".
But I tried opening up ALL ICMP, just in case... and that didn't help. So I set it back to just 0 and 8, as suggested in the FAQ.
Next I checked MTU. Using drtcp
My MTU was blank. Both for dialup, and for broadband.
I set both to the lowest reccommendation.
Still no workee.
It finally worked when I allowed my browser tcp access out to ports 8085 and 8086. Just like caffienator experienced.
And like him, I am wondering why those ports are used, and why that info is not in the faq ?
One final, while the test was accurate and gave me good feedback, it didn't really do anything for my connection. I'm afraid my connection problems seem to be soley caused by terrain.
Hopefully Sprint will convert the nextel tower that I have line of sight to, to EVDO RevA pretty soon. LOL |
|
caffeinator
Coming soon to a cup near you..
Premium
join:2005-01-16
Spokane, WA
·WebBand
| reply to fatness
AH, doh.
Didn't see that there..must need new glasses again.
I still think adding the specific ports used (unless they are random) to the faq entry might help folks. Most users I know would have no clue on how to do what I did to fix it.
Saying that certain apps might interfere is kinda vague to my mind.
Thanks,
CaFF
--
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - A. Einstein |
|
justin
Australian
join:1999-05-28
Brooklyn, NY
Host:
IPv6
Business Connectiv..
Home/Office setup ..
Console/Handheld g..
Console Tech
| reply to Luka1
You are one of the small minority who find that the download phase hangs in the tweak test. I've never got anyone to either work with me to find out who, or to post back if they find out the problem.
You could try reducing MTU, you could also try disabling everything else on your PC or trying a different PC to isolate the issue to a PC or to your modem/connection.
If you had time, you could arrange with me a specific time that you want to run the test and tell me your IP so I can run a sniffer, or you could download and run a sniffer and try to find out why the download of 1mb of data doesn't complete.. |
|
Name Game
Premium
join:2002-07-07
North Myrtle Beach, SC
| reply to caffeinator
said by caffeinator :Nowhere that I could find does it specifically say we have to open those ports to use the test. I see this as a potential problem...and should be clearly marked in the Tool's FAQ if they are to be used for the test IMO. -CaFF Which is why I suggested that if you could become pingable..that usually is an indication it will work for ya.
Those firewalls and routers sure are smart these days.
I found that out one day when doing this speed test
»www.speedtest.net/
some do not like that one since it also does it with flash stuff..but it is still my cup of tea. and it stores my previous tests.
»www.speedtest.net/
--
Gladiator Security Forum »www.gladiator-antivirus.com/ Missing Kids »www.missingkids.com/ |
|
fatness
subtle
Janitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing
·EarthLink
Host:
Earthlink DSL
TekSavvy
Forum Feature Requ..
Need Site Help?
Rants, Raves, and ..
| reply to Luka1
Often the cause of results not displaying is a third-party software application: »Tools FAQ »Tweak Test - Speed Test Problems
--
Sure, that'll work.. |
|
NetFixer
Freedom is NOT Free
Premium
join:2004-06-24
Murfreesboro, TN
·Vonage
·AT&T Southeast
·Cingular Wireless
·AT&T CallVantage
| reply to caffeinator
said by caffeinator :Old paranoid habits die hard I guess That is not always a bad thing. |
|
caffeinator
Coming soon to a cup near you..
Premium
join:2005-01-16
Spokane, WA
·WebBand
| reply to NetFixer
said by NetFixer :Why are you masking the last two octets of the private LAN IP address? LOL, I didn't even think of it..just been a habit from when I wasn't using a LAN address.
(previously just firewall and modem, no NAT}
Old paranoid habits die hard I guess
--
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - A. Einstein |
|
NetFixer
Freedom is NOT Free
Premium
join:2004-06-24
Murfreesboro, TN
·Vonage
·AT&T Southeast
·Cingular Wireless
·AT&T CallVantage
1 edit | reply to caffeinator
Glad you got your tweak test problem resolved.
Just a quick question about the firewall log you displayed. Why are you masking the last two octets of the private LAN IP address?
--
We can never have enough of nature. We need to witness our own limits transgressed, and some life pasturing freely where we never wander.
Test your firewall. |
|
caffeinator
Coming soon to a cup near you..
Premium
join:2005-01-16
Spokane, WA
·WebBand
4 edits | reply to Luka1
Odd, I've used the tweak test many times...although not in some time.
Just tried it and it loads just fine, but failed saying couldn't connect.
Checked my firewall (the software one) and saw this:
The port 80's are dslreports that were open..but why is it using those odd ports for the test?
Its' the same NAC netblock as dslreports..but those oddball ports are a problem.
*edit*
Ok, made a rule to allow that outgoing traffic..test runs fine..until it tries using yet another port after the analyze was done. This time 8085 instead of 8086. 
After editing the rule to allow both ports, it worked just fine. But, why the odd ports?
Mind you, I have an rules-based software firewall as well as a hardware one. Who says packet filters can't manage outgoing traffic...
Nowhere that I could find does it specifically say we have to open those ports to use the test. I see this as a potential problem...and should be clearly marked in the Tool's FAQ if they are to be used for the test IMO.
As is is, there's no entry for the Tweak Test in the Tool's FAQ at all, much less any ports that might need to be opened.
-CaFF
--
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - A. Einstein |
|
