Problems with Low ID on Emule/Edonkey?

[Cantara]

Well, here it is an humble contribution to those who use WL-500g and Emule, and they can't connect to the servers without getting Low ID.


The Asus Router is the gateway to the Internet, and all the Emule clients who want to make a connection, they only recognize the router IP, and 'forget' the computer IP. With this, we need to make a 4672UDP and 4662TCP ports mapping configuration (they're the ones used by Emule). How? In this case, using the Virtual Server from the Wl-500g:

First of all you need to know the IP of the computer that you use with Emule.

Then go to the router configuration:

- Choose "NAT Settings", and "Virtual Server".



1- If it isn't enabled, enable the "Virtual Server".

2- In "Well-Known Applications" choose de option "User defined".

3- Now the crucial part. Under the Virtual Server List, in the "Local IP" you place the IP of your computer (on the example, 192.168.1.2, i.e. my emule computer ip), "Port Range" put 4662 and Protocol TCP. "Protocol nº." stays blank, and in the "description" you can put Emule Rule Nº1.

4- Click ADD, to add the rule to the table.

- Again you make the same passes from 3 to add the second rule:

3- In the "Port Range" you place 4672 instead 4662, and on Protocol you place UDP instead TCP. On "Description" you can place Emule Rule Nº2.

4- Click ADD.

5- After making the 2 rules, click Finish, and on the next screen click on Save&Restart button.

In the next time you start Emule, you can acess to the servers without Low ID.

I was based in some information I saw about Low ID in Emule. I think this is the best way to do the trick. If there is one better or this one is wrong, please tell me. It works for me!

[MagicBoy]

That's correct.

I set up my WL-500g using the same type of method when I got it a few weeks ago. The ports above are for eMule. eDonkey defaults to TCP 4662 and UDP 4665.

[Antiloop]

it would be nice, if emule could make use of uPnP. then it would be able to open up the ports itself.

and perhaps we can add a special application page or something in the router

or readytoset rules for things like this.

[Cantara]

Well, I think uPnP is very insecure if anyone has it enabled on windows xp. You can see more details here

[Antiloop]

interresting article, but as far as i understand this is more a problem of pc's exposed directly to the internet

UPnP could be disabled at the XP machine, but it stays acting like a UPnP client. so i guess it can still open incoming ports etc because the wl500g acts as a UPnP server(and this isn't exposed to the internet)

[rexmedorum]

how about MSN file transfer? Doesn't work for me

[Antiloop]

late reply i know.

msn should work fine, WITHOUT any port forwardings etc..

probably problem of your ISP or you are behind another router/nat (speedtouch that does NAT or something)

[Cantara]

I made some changes to the tutorial. Added one image by request!

[coolzero]

What if I have two PC's using e-Mule?

Imagine the situation...

I have a laptop with a WL-107g wireless card and a ethernet card...

My WL-107g is 192.168.1.4 and ethernet 192.168.1.3.

How can I make e-Mule work with one of the interface without having to change IP's in the router and then reboot?

I don't see the logic of fowarding ONE port to TWO IP's...

I'm interessed because sometimes I use cable for filesharing and others i'm only interessed in *just* e-Mule download. Rebooting the router every time I want a change is very

Tanks

[bramfm]

Well, I think uPnP is very insecure if anyone has it enabled on windows xp. You can see more details here

This is an old article based on the first release of windows XP (pre SP1). In the mean time the UPnP exposure to the WAN side has been switched off. The only problem I have with UPnP (IGD) is the fact virii and/or spyware can make use of UPnP and can open ports autonomously.

[Styno]

Indeed: UPnP is a reasonable security risk. If you don't need it really badly, turn it off.

Forwarding traffic to 2 IP's on local lan can't be done via userinterface, AFAIK.

Hmm, old topic anyway...

[Antiloop]

Indeed: UPnP is a reasonable security risk. If you don't need it really badly, turn it off.

Forwarding traffic to 2 IP's on local lan can't be done via userinterface, AFAIK.

Hmm, old topic anyway...

hm? from 1 port forwarding to 2 IP's you mean?

anyway

for emule create another (increase portnumber) port and forward that to the second pc, ofcourse tell E-Mule it uses another portnumber

[Tamadite]

This post comes from thread "NAT within packets"

Originally Posted by Antiloop
in fact UnPnP disables the server, and thus not the Windows uPnP client..
the wl500g does not accept uPnP shit from the outside..
meaning that you can run with uPnP...

Despite of the UPnP implementation Microsoft has done of this technology my concerns about security are mainly related to the whole concept itself.

A malicious code on a host in the LAN can exploit the UPnP technology to send unauthorised user information/system though a firewall by freely opening ports on the firewall.

IMHO Asus firewall should show or keep the track of the opened ports by UPnP.

[Thorz]

I am puzled, it doesn't work for me The strange thing is that Azureus and kazaa Lite work perfect but last eMule 0.44d still gives me low ID. I have openned lots of ports that were indicated the help (TCP and UDP).
Anyone has an idea what is the problem?

[WlanMan]

Hi

You definitively only have to oben a TCP forward for the TCP port you set in Emule and an UDP forward for the emule UDP port. Not some random ports noted somewhere...
Then reboot the router and reboot your PC to be on the save side.
It will Work...


Greets