PPTP get ipv4 network speed so slow

[liuxyon]

 I choice an faster ipv6 he.net server, but get an so slow ipv4 adddress. Can I allow the choice fast ipv4 to replace ipv4 address?

and  hope add ipv4 rDNS Delegations like ipv6.


:)

[broquea]

I'm not certain what that first question is, but the rdns is fixed the same as your IPv6 tunnel's ptp, so it will have your username and which tserv location you are using.

[liuxyon]

I'm not certain what that first question is, but the rdns is fixed the same as your IPv6 tunnel's ptp, so it will have your username and which tserv location you are using.

What I mean is automatically assigned ipv4 address network speed very slow.

eg: 184.104.12.*  the ipv4 address network speed so slow from visit from us.  I hope may choice fast ipv4 address that  like choice ipv6 server.

Do not know if you understand ?

[kcochran]

The IP address you're assigned is on the same tserv your tunnel is on.

[liuxyon]

The IP address you're assigned is on the same tserv your tunnel is on.

72.52.104.74 tserv3.fmt2.ipv6.he.net   this ipv4 address is fast.

but I get the  184.104.12.219 is so slow.


and I often encounter the same problem: PPTP Connected but no Traffic 

http://www.tunnelbroker.net/forums/index.php?topic=947.0

[broquea]

Define fast and slow, you have only listed IPs, not what you are doing to determine transfer speed (not that I'd know what you could possibly do to test transfer speed off of the tserv directly over IPv4, seeing as it doesn't serve content).

[liuxyon]

Define fast and slow, you have only listed IPs, not what you are doing to determine transfer speed (not that I'd know what you could possibly do to test transfer speed off of the tserv directly over IPv4, seeing as it doesn't serve content).

I ping 72.52.104.74 get 215ms

but ping 184.104.12.219 get 400-500ms  Whatever the reason, it is always slow.

[broquea]

Sounds like where ever you sourced the ping from, it went to Fremont, and then back to your computer, which would account for the 200+ in each direction when pinging it.

In fact, that is it more than likely. Traced from a host in Asia:

Code Select Expand

 5. tserv3.fmt2.ipv6.he.net       0.0%     1  227.8 227.8 227.8 227.8   0.0
 6. liuxyon-1.tserv3.fmt2.dyn.he  0.0%     1  484.6 484.6 484.6 484.6   0.0


[liuxyon]

Sounds like where ever you sourced the ping from, it went to Fremont, and then back to your computer, which would account for the 200+ in each direction when pinging it.

In fact, that is it more than likely. Traced from a host in Asia:

Code Select Expand

 5. tserv3.fmt2.ipv6.he.net       0.0%     1  227.8 227.8 227.8 227.8   0.0
 6. liuxyon-1.tserv3.fmt2.dyn.he  0.0%     1  484.6 484.6 484.6 484.6   0.0


--- Session Transcript ---
Wed 2010-06-02 22:37:49: [170:1] Parsing message <xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx\pd35000019212.msg>
Wed 2010-06-02 22:37:49: [170:1] *  From: *
Wed 2010-06-02 22:37:49: [170:1] *  To: ipv6@he.net
Wed 2010-06-02 22:37:49: [170:1] *  Subject: Re: [#1403747] Re: tunnelbroker can't login
Wed 2010-06-02 22:37:49: [170:1] *  Size (bytes): 8551
Wed 2010-06-02 22:37:49: [170:1] *  Message-ID: <WC20100602142650.850001@*.org>
Wed 2010-06-02 22:37:49: [170:1] Attempting SMTP connection to [he.net]
Wed 2010-06-02 22:37:49: [170:1] Resolving MX records for [he.net] (DNS Server: 66.165.162.24)...
Wed 2010-06-02 22:37:50: [170:1] *  P=001 S=000 D=he.net TTL=(1429) MX=[he.net] {216.218.186.2}
Wed 2010-06-02 22:37:50: [170:1] Attempting SMTP connection to [216.218.186.2:25]
Wed 2010-06-02 22:37:50: [170:1] *  216.218.186.2 in connection failure cache for up to 5 minutes due to previous connection failure(s)
Wed 2010-06-02 22:37:50: [170:1] Attempting to send message to smart host
Wed 2010-06-02 22:37:50: [170:1] Attempting SMTP connection to [smtp.gmail.com:25]
Wed 2010-06-02 22:37:50: [170:1] Resolving A record for [smtp.gmail.com] (DNS Server: 66.165.162.24)...
Wed 2010-06-02 22:37:50: [170:1] *  D=gmail-smtp-msa.l.google.com TTL=(5) A=[72.14.213.109]
Wed 2010-06-02 22:37:50: [170:1] Attempting SMTP connection to [72.14.213.109:25]
Wed 2010-06-02 22:37:50: [170:1] Waiting for socket connection...
Wed 2010-06-02 22:38:11: [170:1] *  Winsock Error 10065 The host is unreachable.  Are you connected to the network?
Wed 2010-06-02 22:38:11: [170:1] *  72.14.213.109 added to connection failure cache for 5 minutes
Wed 2010-06-02 22:38:11: [170:1] This message is 10 minutes old; it has 0 minutes left in this queue
Wed 2010-06-02 22:38:11: [170:1] Remote queue lifetime exceeded; message placed in retry queue
--- End Transcript ---

[kcochran]

Yes, that log is completely expected.  Is there some reason you're sending mail directly to MX and not sending via some smart-host via an authenticated means (MSA)?

[liuxyon]

Yes, that log is completely expected.  Is there some reason you're sending mail directly to MX and not sending via some smart-host via an authenticated means (MSA)?

not. First to use the local network mail server sends, if send fail, and then use the other server forwards.

[kcochran]

Yes, that log is completely expected.  Is there some reason you're sending mail directly to MX and not sending via some smart-host via an authenticated means (MSA)?

not. First to use the local network mail server sends, if send fail, and then use the other server forwards.

Wed 2010-06-02 22:37:50: [170:1] Attempting SMTP connection to [216.218.186.2:25]

That's direct to the MX for ipv6@he.net and the first attempted connection in your log.  As an end-user that's bad form and that sort of thing is one thing which gets IPs on DNSBLs.  As such, you'll find it won't work on the PPTP connection.  Use 587/MSA to a smart-host you are authorized to use for outgoing email.

[liuxyon]

Yes, that log is completely expected.  Is there some reason you're sending mail directly to MX and not sending via some smart-host via an authenticated means (MSA)?

when I not your pptp vpn,then mail sever send mail is normal.

[liuxyon]

I found some information. Do not know if that helps. just share.

http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies-archive.cfm/389198.html
http://www.joshcook.net/2008/07/pptp-routing-interesting-traffic/


@echo off
cls

; REM vpn.bat
; REM Mark Hudy
; REM 5/14/2009
; REM
; REM This batch file connects a VPN by it's "exact name", username and password
; REM Queries the routing table for a network value (192.168.1) and writes the results to %temp%\routes.txt
; REM Parses %temp%\routes.txt grabbing the value from the 3rd column in the top row only (pptp gateway)
; REM and adds a route for the foreign network (1.2.3.4/24) using the pptp gateway.
; REM The 'pause' at the end allows the user/customer to view the results before the window closes
; REM and assumes you have created a shortcut pointing to the batch file.

echo.
echo ——————————-
echo VPN Status:
rasdial
echo ——————————-

:start
echo.
echo [1] Sample VPN Connect
echo [2] Sample VPN Disconnect
echo [3] Do Neither and Cancel
echo.
set /p userinp=choose a number(1-3):
set userinp=%userinp:~0,1%
if "%userinp%"=="1″ goto 1
if "%userinp%"=="2″ goto 2
if "%userinp%"=="3″ goto close
echo invalid choice
goto start

:1
rasdial "Sample VPN Connection" SomeUsername SomePassword >NUL
route print |find "192.168.1″ >%temp%\routes.txt
@for /f "tokens=3″ %%i in ('type %temp%\routes.txt') do @set pptpGateway=%%i & goto :StopParsing

:StopParsing
route add 1.2.3.4 mask 255.255.255.0 %pptpGateway% >NUL
echo Sample VPN Connection is now connected.
goto :end

:2
rasdial "Sample VPN Connection" /disconnect >NUL
echo Sample VPN Connection is now disconnected.

:end
echo.
pause

:close

[afriendinJesus]

Yes, that log is completely expected.  Is there some reason you're sending mail directly to MX and not sending via some smart-host via an authenticated means (MSA)?

when I not your pptp vpn,then mail sever send mail is normal.

In non-tech words, you can set your email client (such as Thunderbird which is what I use on Linux) to SMTP port 587. The default port is 25.

This should allow your mail to go out over PPTP just fine.