Exposed host or directly doing ip packets over a dsl bridge or there are many other solutions not involving nat/translating router. Maybe his host does pppoe or pppoe via that dsl device on its own, or its via dhcp direct ethernet frames and ip connection on top,
Thanks! I read it as nothing needed if directly connected. After specifying port it seems to be working (but with errors):
./safe_vault
WARN 10:52:38.650711501 [w_result lib.rs:288] Failed to find an IGD gateway on network interface enp9s0 91.153.237.xxx. igd::search_gateway_from_timeout returned an error: IO error: Resource temporarily unavailable (os error 11)
WARN 10:53:45.735088192 [crust::connection connection.rs:163] TCP direct connect failed: Deserialisation failure
WARN 10:53:45.735154136 [crust::bootstrap bootstrap.rs:121] Error connecting to bootstrap peer: Deserialisation failure
WARN 10:53:45.783000998 [crust::connection connection.rs:163] TCP direct connect failed: Connection refused (os error 111)
edit: on virtualbox it panics:
./safe_vault
WARN 11:21:16.045636638 [w_result lib.rs:288] Failed to find an IGD gateway on network interface enp0s3 91.153.239.xxx. igd::search_gateway_from_timeout returned an error: IO error: Resource temporarily unavailable (os error 11)
thread ‘’ panicked at ‘Unable to start crust::Service FileHandler(JsonParserError(SyntaxError(“EOF While parsing value”, 1, 1)))’, /home/maidsafe/.cargo/registry/src/github.com-88ac128001ac3a9a/routing-0.16.3/src/core.rs:285
note: Run with RUST_BACKTRACE=1 for a backtrace.
Please do visit this thread and see all the previous posts (those are log lines for development and debugging and so forth).
On another note what do you mean by “direectly connected”?
Directly connected means without a router/firewall.
Most routers act as a firewall so you can tell the vault to use a particular TCP/IP port (the number you put in the configuration file), but the router/firewall won’t let packets of data pass through on this port unless you explicitly tell it to. That’s the “port forwarding” and requires you to know how to configure your particular router.
This should not be needed later, when UTP hole punching is added, but MaidSafe have left that out deliberately for these tests.
If you’re using borowed internet you might be better waiting for UTP rather than messing with someone else’s router. It can also be a pig to configure in my experience - some routers say they do it, but don’t work quite as advertised.
7 Likes
Note to devs:
After leaving my node running for a while last night it got up to 32 peers.
INFO 19:53:09.967336100 [routing::core core.rs:424] | Node(17b2..) PeerId(6e0f..) - Routing Table size: 32 |
Then I got a bunch of messages like
ERROR 20:05:36.708153100 [crust::connection connection.rs:803] Error receiving from PeerId(f59f..): Error { repr: Custom(Custom { kind: InvalidData, error: StringError("Deserialisation failure") }) }
ERROR 20:07:15.810542900 [crust::connection connection.rs:803] Error receiving from PeerId(5c02..): Error { repr: Custom(Custom { kind: InvalidData, error: StringError("Deserialisation failure") }) }
ERROR 20:07:16.705937000 [crust::connection connection.rs:803] Error receiving from PeerId(df79..): Error { repr: Custom(Custom { kind: InvalidData, error: StringError("Deserialisation failure") }) }
ERROR 20:07:21.733871600 [crust::connection connection.rs:803] Error receiving from PeerId(df79..): Error { repr: Custom(Custom { kind: InvalidData, error: StringError("Deserialisation failure") }) }
ERROR 20:07:36.850857300 [crust::connection connection.rs:803] Error receiving from PeerId(f59f..): Error { repr: Custom(Custom { kind: InvalidData, error: StringError("Deserialisation failure") }) }
Then a bunch of
INFO 20:07:36.880937800 [routing::core core.rs:1320] Connection to PeerId(46b3..) failed. Dropping peer.
INFO 20:07:36.880937800 [routing::core core.rs:1320] Connection to PeerId(d32d..) failed. Dropping peer.
INFO 20:07:36.880937800 [routing::core core.rs:1320] Connection to PeerId(715a..) failed. Dropping peer.
and finally
INFO 20:07:36.880937800 [routing::core core.rs:424] | Node(17b2..) PeerId(6e0f..) - Routing Table size: 0 |
I restarted my node using keyboard interrupt. Not sure if it is getting peers.
2 Likes
So, my launcher has not gotten past “Trying to connect to SAFE Network” at all since my problems logging in and/or registering started yesterday.
I’ve got the exact same problem.
Same here, looks like the network is down.
@Ross looking at the roadmap I see and am very pleased to see vaults on ARM and mobile (as you know 
). I can’t see anything about a mobile client.
I thought that a mobile client was a higher priority than mobile vaults. Has this been put back, dropped, overlooked? Thanks.
Network reset
The team are are currently looking into resetting the network and bringing it back up with more valid info messages from the run binaries so you’ll see more clearly what connections to peers you would have by default without needing to set RUST_LOG. Also the node joining process is seeing a few tweaks to prevent a huge influx of joining nodes at the same time to the network. Thank you for participating and we will update the community when this is rolling out.
Cheers
Ross
8 Likes
@happybeing this I am not 100% sure on - I will try and track down the folks that are 100% on this and get back to you, these folks are all over the place in meetings today so will come back as soon as I can.
1 Like
That was faster and simpler than expected - it was just missed out and will be added to the roadmap - good catch thanks.
2 Likes
Is there anyone with a working setup? could we get a docker image created maybe?
cheers
Front
Not sure if this is relevant info in anyway, but at first I was having problems getting connections established when running the vault. Then I noticed that it kept trying to go out my virtualbox network adapter which was enabled, but unused. I disabled all my adapters (cisco, virtualbox, hyperv, etc) and when left my primary adapter enabled, it was able to hit the gateway and get out.
2 Likes
networking issue: if that internal address and interface has ho default gateway set and no way to send packets to the outer predefined bootstrap nodes, you will not get booted into the network.
Yes, but why is it trying to use that adapter in the first place when it should be using my primary preferred adapter
I didnt check. Does it bind to 0.0.0.0 or ::1 or to specific? It maybe uses all interfaces or who or what and how exactly defines a default? What OS are you on?
‘Recent’ linux kernels and related tools give us the feature of ip network namespaces, where you can later on specify a command to run within that scope of settings.
Research the topic e.g. at:
1 Like
My guess is (still installing packet logging software to confirm) that it just starts throwing out info on every network interface that it finds. That would make sense since its whole goal is to “get me on the internet however you can” type of connections happening.
1 Like
At the time of testing, using Windows 10. I have my adapter priority set so it goes off my wifi adapter is at the top of the list, which is the only adapter that has proper IP settings. Just curious and wondering why it was trying to go off another one first. Just wanted to bring that up in case that is something that could be fixed or could be an issue for someone. Otherwise disabling the unused adapters fixed the problem I was having.
Is the network up again yet?