spot my mistake please, second fzs on home ed in same networ

[grantpet]

in accordance to avoiding the double transfer issue by sharing network drives on fzs, i have installed fzs onto a home ed pc inside my network.

everything on the original set up works completely correctly, i can connect to the home ed pc inside my LAN using fzc no problems; however, outside fzc attempting to connect are not able to retrieve a directory listing, the server shows a 425 can't open data connection error.


the home ed pc is clean and has no programs installed except windows, official windows updates, fzs 0.9.27b, and fzc 3.1.1.1 -- windows firewall is off, however since no exceptions were required for the mce original setup, none were made for this home ed setup (i have not been able to identify any final word on whether or not this is required for all, some, or no computers).

the two server setups are identical with the following exceptions:

--home ed pc is listening on port 3333 rather than 21 (i am not interested in adding sftp support yet, but believe using the same port is incorrect).

--home ed pc is using port range 5601-5650 rather than 5550-5600 for passive mode custom ranges

--home ed pc admin interface listens on 14148 rather than 14147

i now am forwarding ports 20,21,5550-5600, & 14147 to the original mce pc
and forwarding ports 3332,3333, 5601-5650, & 14148 to the home ed pc

do i have an incorrect port choice for a second ftp server or is there a home ed setting i have to change i may have missed?

i have some related questions, but will bite my lip until i can figure this out. again, only outside clients are not able to acquire the directory, every thing else seems awesome.

thanks again for all the help!

[cszeto]

So what are the respective results when the router is out of the equation?

[grantpet]

i have a linksys gateway wcg-200, router + modem, i don't think testing that is an option for me.

[cszeto]

You might be at a dead end, if it turns out to be the Linksys... You might try setting up your testing from the opposite direction directly to net out the Linksys up front...

[botg]

Unless you want to administrate the server from far away, you don't want to forward the administration port.

[grantpet]

that will save me some much needed space on my port forward options page.

i will reverse the scene tomorrow and see what i get.

[grantpet]

port 21 is the only port anyone off LAN can connect to on either machine.

all ports i've tested with work fine inside the LAN, either direction, either pc.

i really don't think this problem is related to the linksys, i'm thinking windows firewall, even though its off.

do i have to add the ports (other than 21 apparently) to the windows firewall exception list?

nope, that's not it unless a reboot is required

[cszeto]

If things work correctly for both machines within each internal network, then it's something to do outside of the internal networks - WAN equipment or ISP.... You have already proven functionality of the Filezilla server two times over...

Any chance both internal networks share the same IP plan, if NATted?

[grantpet]

the linksys is a NAT device. i don't know what you mean by ip PLAN.

everything is as bland as i can think of on the router controls, and its not a new device nor is the firmware...ie, no odd hidden settings from me.

the two computers are sequentially ip'd within the appropriate dhcp range and not equalling the local netwrok ip

i have changed the following security settings on the linksys from enabled to disabled; firewall protection; filter multicast; block fragmented ip packets; and block anon internet requests.

anything in the local area network advanced connection settings i should be checking?

so this boils down to, i can't use any other port except 21.

[cszeto]

If you do not understand how IP addressing works, then you have a huge uphill handicap to setting up any servers/services. This is not a negative "dig" as some folks may want to spin it, but a fact. Setting up servers/services across a network does require networking knowledge. The more complex the network, the more advanced knowledge needed - period. No shortcuts, no more any secret chants than say the different skills needed to program.

You never mentioned what the other device is on the opposite end nor its network configuration. You are probably running into some networking situation between your network, the Internet or the network at the opposite end of the connection.

[grantpet]

i understand ip addressing, just never heard the phrase ip plan.

i figured since the the only difference is the port on my end, the other end's setup was moot. you think i am wrong about this? the fzc client software settings on all machines are the same *(excluding port ranges).

i'm not trying to network some mega business, just a couple of standard windows machines at this point, not worried about any of the bells and whistles. occasionally the proper information cannot be related, it took forever to get a definitive alias creation process out of ppl it shouldn't have even required thought for (and i was doing it correctly the entire time i was being told i was wrong).

i may not know the networking realm as well as someone with VIP or programmer on their tag, but i know enough to make this software function; and its certainly not beyond me.

are we positive the fzs data channel is always 1 less than the command port?

still no reason to suspect the router of blocking any ports for any reason and all security features are off, i've looked through the linksys forum and found zero. i will call my cisco engineer on monday if i can find reason to.

i keep comming back to the windows firewall advanced tab, local area connections advanced settings: ftp server wasn't required to be checked to work with just port 21, and if you try to edit it, you can't change the port from port 21, its greyed out. i've added the port to the exceptions list, both tcp and udp.

at this point i'm just trying to get just one instance of fzs on one machine on any port other than 21.

i can't seem to find a definitive answer on whether you actually can ftp on a port other than 21, i've read both that only 21 can be used and also ports 21 & >1024 ....

i don't think i'm back to a passive server vs active client (or vice versa) issue, i think i've got them all set correctly, any specific rules i may have overlooked?

[grantpet]

i was wondering if this could be it:

On outbound connections the LinkSys will actually change this MSS value on-the-fly to be what the setting is. You could say the LinkSys “enforces” the MTU that is set. Even if the PC sends MTU=1500 the LinkSys changes it in the SYN packet - this is how the other end *really* sees 1492 (if that is what the LinkSys is set to). This is desirable since you can run your LAN at 1500 MTU yet go out to the net at 1492 automatically!

But server connections don’t seem to get this help. Not only that, the ISP equipment and/or the DSL modem lets these SYNs come in saying they’re 1500 MTU! The LinkSys does no alteration (it’s INbound not OUTbound). The PC is happy (it’s 1500 MTU after all) so these 2 ends try 1500 MTU…. BUT THAT DOESN’T WORK ON PPPoE!

The result is large packets (above 1492 MTU) will not transfer well at all and usually just hangs the TCP stack.

One funny thing you WILL see… small data transfers of, for example, small directories or small html files DO get through OK. This is because the packet size never reaches a fatal value.

The MTU and FTP

This MTU mismatch may also show it’s ugly head on FTP connections - but for clients not servers. This is because a regular (not PASV) FTP connection on port 21 includes an inbound connection to the client. There’s no reason this inbound (data) connection wouldn’t have the same darn problem (since it *is* a server by definition).

Most everyone with a router that uses FTP has seen the inability to list directories. This MTU mismatch can be yet another possible cause of this

i suppose changing my mtu to 1492 and testing would verify this, but i was hoping someone could stop me from wasting time.

[grantpet]

the more different server software posts i read, the worse the port choice gets.

some say port 199 or 2100 are standard ftp ports also.

some say not to use ports 1024-4999 since so many other programs use them.

some say ports over 35500 i think it was.

other say any port under 100.

the one similar issue i found a user having in smartftp had his fixed with server software update, i don't think that's the problem here.

some chat outside of linksys forum indicates some linksys routers do have trouble with a tcp on ports other than 21, but i can't find any solutions that aren't already correct here. with the exception of a really technical post that resulted in the use of freedns service i believe. i was really hoping that wasn't necessary.

[cszeto]

"i understand ip addressing"

IP addressing requirements between multiple NATs is different than straight IP addressing.

"i'm not trying to network some mega business"

The Internet is a "mega" heterogeneous network, much more complex than any homogeneous business network.

"i will call my cisco engineer on monday if i can find reason to."

Probably your best bet at this point.

[grantpet]

some of you sure are thick with the snide insults and sacarsm.

IP addressing requirements between multiple NATs is different than straight IP addressing.

understood

The Internet is a "mega" heterogeneous network, much more complex than any homogeneous business network.

no kidding

Probably your best bet at this point.

i'd like to rule out the fzs setup and port usage before i bother him; and the first words out of his mouth are going to be "what server software are you using and is it configured properly". that's why i am here, troubleshooting assistance.

how about some straight answers to some of my questions rather than sidestepping them please.