Related
I'd like to move video files from my Linux server to my Nexus 7. But I can't seem to get good transfer speeds. All transfers are over the LAN; no Internet hops involved.
Part 1:
I've tried using cafeFTP for SFTP and I consistently get speeds around 300 KB/s.
I've tried using AndSMB for Samba and I consistently get speeds around 400 KB/s (and Samba has file name issues).
I tried getting MTP to work, but it was really flaky; and I'd prefer a wireless solution.
My laptop (running Linux) transfers the same files via SFTP at up to 3 MB/s.
What kinds of speeds are people usually getting?
This is my first Android device so I have no other experience with Android transfer speeds.
Part 2
Best solution for transferring files from Linux to Nexus 7 without interacting with Linux machine (headless server)?
Also, does anyone have a solution that actually works to queue up a large transfer and keep trying until it's done? Both cafeFTP and AndSMB disconnect arbitrarily and then I have to reconnect and restart the transfers. This is incredibly inconvenient when trying to move a couple of movies overnight.
Misc. Info
My router is a WRT54GL running Tomato; I've been through its settings, but didn't find anything I thought would help.
I have done tons of searching about this; but there are so many garbage sites with no useful information covered in ads. I'm having a really hard time finding reputable information.
Thanks.
What sort of speeds do you get on a PC vs a PC?
EDIT: Blind.
What link speed are you getting in wireless info?
My speed with amdsmb copying from win 7 network drive to tablet
Mines fine. Using Linksys E-1500 2.4GHz 802.11n
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app
Mutilatory said:
What sort of speeds do you get on a PC vs a PC?
EDIT: Blind.
What link speed are you getting in wireless info?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Showing 54 MB/s for both the laptop and the Nexus 7: Full 802.11g connection. Server is 100 MB/s.
Edit: I'm going to check the information when I get home to make sure I'm not idiotically mixing up bits and bytes...
Edit2: Checked info (updated original post for clarity):
SFTP: Laptop 802.11g transferring at 1.9 MB/s. Nexus 7 802.11g transferring at ~300KB/s
tylerwatt12 said:
Mines fine. Using Linksys E-1500 2.4GHz 802.11n
--Can't quote the image location--
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Isn't 800 KB/s pretty slow for an 802.11n connection?
My laptop transfers the same files at up to 3 MB/s over 802.11g (shouldn't you be getting like 3x that on 802.11n?) . But I'm only getting around 1/10th that on my Nexus 7.
Using FTP I get ~2MB/s. Strange
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app
Amitola85 said:
Isn't 800 KB/s pretty slow for an 802.11n connection?
My laptop transfers the same files at up to 3 MB/s over 802.11g (shouldn't you be getting like 3x that on 802.11n?) . But I'm only getting around 1/10th that on my Nexus 7.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well 800 kB/s is slow even for wireless G which should go 2.5-3 MB/s.
As for N these devices don't have 40 MHz channels so rather than 150 Mbps they are limited to 65 or 72 Mbps link rate, which should translate to about 3.5 MB/s
well i wonder what my problem is then. I have a netgear N300 and my win 7 drive is hardwired to it with ethernet.
I setup a plain FTP server which is getting transfer speeds of ~2100 KB/s. So that's MUCH better.
Perhaps the Nexus 7 just struggles with SFTP (encryption overhead makes this understandable) and Samba (not sure why it's so slow, just cause Samba is lame?).
Guess I'll be doing all my transfers over FTP. This makes me much less grumpy.
Just to recap, here are the transfer speeds I was seeing over 802.11g (54 Mbs connection) from a wired server running Linux:
SFTP: ~300 KB/s (cafeFTP)
Samba: ~400 KB/s (AndSMB)
FTP: ~2,100 KB/s (cafeFTP)
Edit: Current hypothesis is that SFTP and Samba were both maxing out the CPU. I haven't checked with a app to measure it, but the tablet did get hot during those transfers. If that's the case it may be implementation specific and other SFTP / Samba implementations may be more efficient and achieve higher speeds.
Using ES File Explorer and logging onto my windows share, I got file transfers of 700-900KB/sec, pretty poor.
So I set up an FTPServer on android and FileZilla on desktop and I get around 2.8MB/sec on transfers.
Salty Wagyu said:
Using ES File Explorer and logging onto my windows share, I got file transfers of 700-900KB/sec, pretty poor.
So I set up an FTPServer on android and FileZilla on desktop and I get around 2.8MB/sec on transfers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry for resurrecting a year-old thread but I just wanted to thank you for the suggestion of using FTP as the transfer mode as opposed to Samba. It's definitely a bit faster (~700-850KB/s vs 1.5-1.7MB/s). I don't know why you installed FTPServer on your Nexus 7 though, since ES File Manager is an FTP client as well.
I have the same issue:
During copy/move large file i.e. 2-3GB from Nexus 10 to Qnap NAS with ES file explorer I get max. 2.5Mb/s .
Is that normal or pretty slow?
My access point is this one: TP-link tl-wa901nd
karasuhebi said:
I don't know why you installed FTPServer on your Nexus 7 though, since ES File Manager is an FTP client as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's a big difference between an FTP server and an FTP client. if you use a client on Android, you need a server on your PC.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4
garryknight said:
There's a big difference between an FTP server and an FTP client. if you use a client on Android, you need a server on your PC.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right, thanks. Don't know what I was thinking lol.
---------- Post added at 11:06 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:05 AM ----------
friend1 said:
I have the same issue:
During copy/move large file i.e. 2-3GB from Nexus 10 to Qnap NAS with ES file explorer I get max. 2.5Mb/s .
Is that normal or pretty slow?
My access point is this one: TP-link tl-wa901nd
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What's normal on your network is whatever is normal for your network. We wouldn't be able to tell you since there's so many factors that could affect speed. There is something you could use as a sort of measure though: Try a PC-to-NAS file transfer and check what kind of speeds you get there. It's not a scientific way to do it by no means but it should give you a rough estimate of the speed you should expect on transfers to your N10.
I have a Galaxy S4 with the newest firmware from samsung I9505XXUGNF1 (Kitkat 4.4.2). My router is a Asus RT-AC66U to which My S4 connects to with max speed of 433 Mbps. My internet connection is 120 Mbps.
When I do a speedtest on the S4 I get results of over 110 Mbps, but when I'm downloading a file over LAN from the disk connected directly to the router I get download speed only of ~20Mbps (2.4 MB/s) which is very sucky!
My Laptop have only a N network card, and connects to the router with max 300 Mbps and when I download the same file I get over 7.5 MB/s!! (~65 Mbps).
Speedtest also shows results of over 110 Mbps...
I remember when the phone was new, and it had Android 4.3, I had LAN download speed of over 9-10 MB/s...
I tried with different file managers like X-Plore and others, but it looks like it is not the app problem.
Have you tried transferring a file over FTP?
I have a router that accepts a connection to a USB HDD. Right now I access that HDD through PointShare on my computer. But I am thinking of getting a Nexus 7 so am curious if it is possible, through an app, or in WiFi settings to find that HDD and access files I have on it. Does anyone here have access to a hard drive on your network through an Android device?
I can access my NAS running NFS on my network using ES File Explorer. Also my HTPC running Samba...
Kumabjorn said:
I have a router that accepts a connection to a USB HDD. Right now I access that HDD through PointShare on my computer. But I am thinking of getting a Nexus 7 so am curious if it is possible, through an app, or in WiFi settings to find that HDD and access files I have on it. Does anyone here have access to a hard drive on your network through an Android device?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do, but its a WesternDigital ethernet NAS. I use WD2go from Google Play. Works pretty good, can access and listen to music, access(but not change documents just yet), and view and download pictures all over 3g or wifi.
joeyhdownsouth said:
I do, but its a WesternDigital ethernet NAS. I use WD2go from Google Play. Works pretty good, can access and listen to music, access(but not change documents just yet), and view and download pictures all over 3g or wifi.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mine is an I-O Data Device, so I guess that means I'm out of luck?
Didn't know these things were maker specific. Thought you just needed som address to access it.
Kumabjorn said:
Mine is an I-O Data Device, so I guess that means I'm out of luck?
Didn't know these things were maker specific. Thought you just needed som address to access it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What kind of server options can you setup through your router? If you can get an FTP daemon or Samba server, it'll be very easy to setup a connection and stream files or media.
If you router can't do anything, you can still setup a server on your computer rather easily (Windows has a built-in SMB/CIFS server). It's a bit more inconvenient since your computer will have to be on whenever you want to access your files.
Regardless, hard drive make should not matter.
Kumabjorn said:
Mine is an I-O Data Device, so I guess that means I'm out of luck?
Didn't know these things were maker specific. Thought you just needed som address to access it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't know for a couple of days of setting it up that there was an app. You can access most HDDs through internet, just more trouble to setup. You'll need your main IP and know a few things about port forwarding, then again samba only used to require a computer signin name and password.
Is it just me or are WiFi speeds on these tablets very slow? If anyone know Of a fix it would be appreciated.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda premium
I've seen other posts where people have found a small gap in the shell resulting in poor contact inside for the wifi leads. Some were able to squeeze the shell tighter to help and some opened the back and tried to carefully adjust the pins to make better contact. At least one person broke a contact pin, so be careful if you try that. My wi-fi connection and speeds are very good.
I can download a 100 Mb file in less than a minute, and web pages take less that 3 second to load.
Though, I have a 30 Mb/s connection from Charter that I can constantly get up to 45 for some reason.
Last night I transferred GBytes of data via ADB (i did a full tablet wipe and a bunch of restores) and couldn't help but notice that sustained data transfer via (wired) ADB is only about 1.4 Mbytes/sec. Sort of pathetic waiting around for a half-hour to transfer a 2.5 GB file.
Anyway, not to jack the OP (which is about WiFi), but I wanted to try and figure out what my best options are for high-speed backup (I have a 32 GB N7!) - including WiFi as an option.
Ran a couple of file transfer trials this morning using a ROM file that was 150,137,068 bytes.
Results first, more detail on each setup follows. (The results are compared in terms of data payload per second; in the cases where protocol overhead is high, the wire-speeds would be higher than calculated)
[1] SMB/CIFS write via WiFi : 518sec => 2.32 Mbits/sec. UGH (best of three trials)
[2] FTP put via WiFi : 109sec => 11.06 Mbits/sec
[3] FTP get via WiFi : 121sec => 9.9 Mbits/sec
[4] adb pull via USB : 78sec => 15.4 Mbits/sec
[5] adb push via USB : 117sec => 10.3 Mbits/sec
[6]* OTG VFAT write via USB: 33sec => 36.4 Mbits/sec
[7]* MTP copy via USB 13sec => 92.4 Mbits/sec
In the WiFi cases:
- Linksys WRT54G (802.11g) router circa 2006 [ 802.11g theoretical bw 54 Mbps ] 6' away -35 dBm signal
- SMB/CIFS "server" Windows Xp SP3 laptop on 100 Mbps Ethernet segment attached to router
- N7 SMB client app ES File Manager
- FTP Server app (Andreas Liebig) on N7
- FTP client app Windows Xp default ftp app for both push and pull
- Windows box on Ethernet, N7 only on WiFi.
In the OTG case:
- 8 GB Sandisk Class 2 microSD card on a card reader attached to OTG cable; single partition, empty card, VFAT formatting.
In the ADB case:
- adb v 1.0.31, Win 7 Pro x64, Quad-Core i5, USB 2.0
Observing the WinXp task manager performance tab during CIFS or FTP transfers, the wired (Ethernet) link would show a high degree of variability, oscillating between 5 Mbps to 15 Mbps instantaneous rates. Hard to say whether this is a router performance issue or something else (11 Mbits/sec approaches 1000 pkts/sec at a MTU of 1500 bytes).
* The numbers for the OTG and MTP transfer tests are possibly questionable as the role of file caching is unknown - the times given here are only the times that the file transfer dialog(s) remain on-screen. (The writes could be completing in the background out of cache with nothing showing on the screen) In particular, note that the OTG copy involved a "Class 2" microSD card - and yet the write speed seemed closer to 4.5 Mbytes/sec, rather than 2 Mbytes/sec
The SMB/CIFS transfer times are quite pathetic; but as with all performance measurements, any participant in the test could be the long pole in the tent. For instance, the issue might be the ES File Manager app. I did not test with a N7 CIFS-capable kernel.
Also, it would also appear that performance of ADB for file transfers are quite poor - well, in comparison to MTP anyway. Too bad MTP doesn't preserve file timestamps (as well as all sorts of other oddities).
Apologies in advance for using file transfer as a network benchmarking method - my connection to the outside world (DSL) peaks at only 3.8 Mbits/second, so I would need to set up some kind of LAN server to benchmark network performance in absence of flash-memory or hard-drive writes.
Anybody have any performance numbers to share for:
- OTG mounts of hard drives or SSD devices with NTFS or ext4 file systems
- CIFS/SMB network mounts with CIFS-capable kernels
- WiFi speed tests when remote server is via FiOS or U-Verse fiber connection?
========================================================================
[Edit] -- Added some network-only test results.
FWIW, I ran a couple of tests using the "netcat" tool to evaluate the same setup without writing files to mass storage devices. It turned out that a terminal emulator app that I have has a busybox with netcat built in, so I booted the WinXp laptop into a Ubuntu Live CD (10.04LTS), and ran netcat TCP write tests in both directions. I also used "iptraf" to look at peak bit rates.
Result? Peak observed speeds were about 16.6 Mbits/second, and sustained-average results were in the 11-12 Mbit/second range. From that I conclude that that the FTP transfer tests were probably network-limited, as testing involving file writes were really no slower than this. Whether that means the "N7 is WiFi limited" or something else is not deducible from the data I collected. In this case, it takes three to tango (N7 - router - laptop).
I do note however that blahman179 said above "100 MB in less than a minute" - 100 MB in 60 seconds is about 14 Mbits/second. Only a little faster than what I observed - right in the same neighborhood.
Note that I had my WiFi router set to G-only. I suppose that the basic bit rate with huge signals in the -30 dBm range means that the radios are indeed transferring packets at a 54 Mbit/sec bit rate - but with a duty factor of less than 30%.
@OP:
fwiw, I did a little searching. Some XDA N7 users with high speed ISP connections report peak download rates of 20-30 Mbps when connected to networks that can do much better than this using PCs.
That "speedtest.net" app reports peak values recorded over short intervals - I suppose that sustained (average) transfer rates are somewhat worse than this.
bftb0 said:
@OP:
fwiw, I did a little searching. Some XDA N7 users with high speed ISP connections report peak download rates of 20-30 Mbps when connected to networks that can do much better than this using PCs.
That "speedtest.net" app reports peak values recorded over short intervals - I suppose that sustained (average) transfer rates are somewhat worse than this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also Comcast and probably others boost your speed for the first part of your download making burst speeds optimistic.
Sent from my SCH-I605 using xda premium
I have 60 megabit, ive not sat and worked it out, but I often get speeds of 5500kb/s on torrents over wifi. Maybe not making use of all my bandwidth, but the downloads come in quick enough for me.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
Having trouble with all wifi connections on my nexus 7... When i am on my home wifi I get 5mbps where all other g connected devices pull 25mbps. That's not so much of a problem. When I am tethered to my cellphone via wifi I get 600kbps with the nexus 7, but my cellphone tethered via wifi to my pc is 4mbps. I'm concluding something is wrong with the link speed on my nexus 7 but don't know what to do about it. Any help would be appreciated cause I really need more then 600kbps when not at home, especially when my phone regularly pulls 10mbps in my area.
I agree with the WiFi connection being slow with the n7.IMho I've seen better download speeds with my galaxy tab 2. I've also noticed with certain kernels the WiFi is faster.stock to me is the best and now I'm running the faux kernel and it ain't too bad.
I just tried the speedtest.net app and averaged about 9.4Mbs down and .68 up. Stock rom, rooted JB.
Over the past couple of weeks since I got a GTX 760 for my main rig, I've been playing with getting Shield streaming to work through a NAT. With a combination of an Android app and Windows app, I've been able to get the Shield to stream through a NAT device.
This is alpha software, so it may not work for you. I'll be continuing development on it to make it more robust based on bug reports filed here and on the GitHub projects
This method is potentially more complex than running a VPN, but it is lower overhead and works in environments where VPNs cannot.
For those who don't care about the technical details, skip the next section.
Relay Technical Details
The Shield uses MDNS to discover compatible streaming PCs. It issues a query for _nvstream._tcp.local to which streaming PCs reply with PTR, A, AAAA, and TXT records. MDNS isn't routable outside of the local network (and sometimes blocked within the network too), so naturally PCs outside the Shield's local network won't be available as streaming targets.
To solve the MDNS problem, I wrote MDNS relays for Android and Windows that operate on UDP port 5354. The Android relay sends MDNS queries to the Windows relay where the Windows relay replays them local and sends the reply back to the Shield. The Android relay then takes the reply and parses it to look at the A record. It replaces the IP address specified in the A record with the IP address it received the MDNS reply from so it can properly connect to PCs behind a NAT. With the MDNS relay code in place, the Shield could see the PC and even start games.
There was still a problem getting the video stream back. It turns out that the way that UDP port 47998 is used on the Shield streaming software running on the PC prevents it from traversing NATs when going back to the Shield because it assumes that the source is always 47998. This is IMHO a bug because all other ports deal with NAT traversal properly, but needless to say I still had to deal with this.
The only option I had for fixing the port 47998 issue was to capture the packets as they go onto the wire in the Windows relay. I used WinPcap to capture the UDP packets leaving the machine. I then filter based on whether the packet was addressed to us. If it's a packet from the Shield to us on port 47998, then I save the source port of that packet. When I see a packet going out from us to port 47998, I extract the data from that packet and send it again on my own socket also bound to port 47998 (so the source port is correct) with the destination specified in the packet and the port that we saved from the Shield's last communication. With this code, the Shield can connect to a PC from behind a NAT.
Instructions
1. Download and install the Shield Proxy APK on the Shield from https://github.com/cgutman/ShieldProxyAndroid/releases
2. Install WinPcap on your streaming PC from http://www.winpcap.org/install/
2.1 Only required for v0.1-- Install the Visual C++ 2013 runtime library for x86 (use x86 even on x64 systems) from http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=39315
3. Ensure your router is configured properly as described in the next section.
4. Download and run the Shield Proxy Windows program on your streaming PC from https://github.com/cgutman/ShieldProxyWindows/releases
5. On the Android app, fill in the externally accessible IP address or DNS name for your router. You can get your external IP address from http://www.whatsmyip.org/ on your streaming PC.
6. Tap the start button to start the Android relay service
7. Stream like normal from the TegraZone app
NAT/Router configuration for Shield streaming
The following ports need to be forwarded to the streaming PC:
UDP 47998, 47999, 48000, 5354 (MDNS relay port)
TCP 35043, 47989, 47991, 47995, 47996
Troubleshooting
Make sure ShieldProxy.exe is allowed through Windows Firewall for Private and Public networks.
Make sure ShieldProxy.exe and the Android Shield Proxy service are running
Make sure the external IP address of your streaming PC is correct in the Android app (use http://www.whatsmyip.org/ from your streaming PC)
If TegraZone doesn't show your PC as online and you see "We haven't received any DNS responses. Is the Windows Shield Proxy running on your PC?",
Ensure the router is properly forwarding the specified ports to your PC. Note that TCP vs UDP matters when setting the router forwarding configuration.
Issues
If anyone encounters problems, please report them here or on the GitHub issues page. I'll try my best to get them fixed.
After getting all the initial setup done, it's seemingly ran great so far; considering the circumstances. Haven't had any errors besides some DNS thing I didn't get to read fully when it booted up Steam but did not have any impact on playability.
DLL error
I keep getting an error that MSVCR120.dll is missing. I checked the windows\system32 folder and it wasn't there, so installed the Visual C++ redistributable package for Visual Studio 2012 and 2013 Preview. This added the DLL to the system32 folder, but still getting the same error after a reboot. Tried copying the DLL to the directory for Shield Proxy and it then gives me an error "The application was unable to start correctly (0xc000007b). Click ok to close the application.
Any ideas?
Thanks and thanks for putting this together!
Cheers!
daethang said:
I keep getting an error that MSVCR120.dll is missing. I checked the windows\system32 folder and it wasn't there, so installed the Visual C++ redistributable package for Visual Studio 2012 and 2013 Preview. This added the DLL to the system32 folder, but still getting the same error after a reboot. Tried copying the DLL to the directory for Shield Proxy and it then gives me an error "The application was unable to start correctly (0xc000007b). Click ok to close the application.
Any ideas?
Thanks and thanks for putting this together!
Cheers!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't remember whether the 64-bit Visual C++ redistributable includes both 32-bit and 64-bit runtime dlls. The relay is built as a 32-bit program so it needs the 32-bit runtime even on a 64-bit machine.
For the next version, I'll build it with the runtime linked into the executable so people won't have to hunt down the runtime.
cgutman said:
I can't remember whether the 64-bit Visual C++ redistributable includes both 32-bit and 64-bit runtime dlls. The relay is built as a 32-bit program so it needs the 32-bit runtime even on a 64-bit machine.
For the next version, I'll build it with the runtime linked into the executable so people won't have to hunt down the runtime.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks - installed the 2013 32bit preview and it worked like a charm after. Will start testing the remote streaming now. Thanks for the quick pointer. Appreciate it!
Cheers
daethang said:
Thanks - installed the 2013 32bit preview and it worked like a charm after. Will start testing the remote streaming now. Thanks for the quick pointer. Appreciate it!
Cheers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cool, I updated the instructions to mention that the Visual C++ 2013 x86 runtime is required.
Oh, nice.
Since VPN method didn't work on my rig, I tried this one... and works great!
thanks a lot.
Seems to be working here as well, although similar to VPN, streaming outside of my WIFI connection doesn't seem to work. The game will start and every once in a while I will see video start (more often though just a blank screen followed by a timeout). My home connection has 55 down and ~12 up, so I think the connection on that end is good. I have tried from multiple remote locations, but none of them have worked so far. Will do some speed tests on the remote connections to see if they are the cause. Splashtop seems to stream fine when on remote connection, so I dont think its a connection issue. One thing that works better on this solution is the PC actually shows as available, for some reason it does not when on VPN.
daethang said:
Seems to be working here as well, although similar to VPN, streaming outside of my WIFI connection doesn't seem to work. The game will start and every once in a while I will see video start (more often though just a blank screen followed by a timeout). My home connection has 55 down and ~12 up, so I think the connection on that end is good. I have tried from multiple remote locations, but none of them have worked so far. Will do some speed tests on the remote connections to see if they are the cause. Splashtop seems to stream fine when on remote connection, so I dont think its a connection issue. One thing that works better on this solution is the PC actually shows as available, for some reason it does not when on VPN.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what it sounds like, the MDNS relay is working fine and the router is definitely configured correctly because you get video sometimes. I assume you also see the message in the ShieldProxy.exe console: "Shield is now communicating with us on port XXXXX".
If I had to speculate, I'd say it's related to high packet loss. Shield streaming (both on the network and through my proxy) use UDP for the video stream and a PPTP VPN uses GRE packets which are both lossy protocols, while Splashtop uses TCP which retransmits lost packets. It may be that the ISP is doing some QoS stuff that's causing non-TCP packets to be dropped at a higher rate, but this is complete speculation.
The Shield pings the streaming PC and the streaming PC sends back video data, but if the pings aren't reaching the streaming PC or the video isn't reaching the Shield, you get the dreaded "Streaming failed due to network interference ... etc" message.
The upside is that we can better troubleshoot the issue based on the output from the Windows Shield proxy. If you could paste that here, I could take a look (remove the last 2 octets of the IP addresses, so 192.168.1.1 becomes 192.168.X.X). Also if you would post what ISP you're using and where you were trying to connect from (whichever ones you feel comfortable mentioning).
I can't seem to get any of those ports open except 47989, even when I change my setup to be directly connected to my SB6141 modem. Port 5354 always appears closed and can't be accessed so I never can see my computer when I try connecting with the shield proxy app posted above.
Anyway to change the port to something other than 5354 or any idea why the port always appears closed even when connected from computer to modem?
Thanks
Edit: It seems only ports that are being listened to on netstat -an will appear as open to a port checker. Shouldn't there be something on that list listening for 5354 in order for Shield proxy to connect to that port?
HobsonA said:
I can't seem to get any of those ports open except 47989, even when I change my setup to be directly connected to my SB6141 modem. Port 5354 always appears closed and can't be accessed so I never can see my computer when I try connecting with the shield proxy app posted above.
Anyway to change the port to something other than 5354 or any idea why the port always appears closed even when connected from computer to modem?
Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ports will appear closed even if the router is properly forwarding them to your PC, but the PC is blocking them. Check your Windows Firewall settings and make sure ShieldProxy.exe is allowed through for both public and private networks. I also found out the hard way that it won't always prompt you to allow for public networks if it's already allowed for private and vice versa.
I think it's normal for those other Shield Streaming ports to be closed until streaming actually starts, but 5354 should appear open while ShieldProxy.exe is running.
It is possible for me to (and I plan to) add some code to make the MDNS relay port configurable but I don't think that would solve your issue here.
EDIT: Also make sure you're testing 5354 (and other UDP ports) as UDP, not TCP. TCP 5354 is not the same as UDP 5354. In fact, you can host different services on the same ports on TCP and UDP at the same time.
cgutman said:
Ports will appear closed even if the router is properly forwarding them to your PC, but the PC is blocking them. Check your Windows Firewall settings and make sure ShieldProxy.exe is allowed through for both public and private networks. I also found out the hard way that it won't always prompt you to allow for public networks if it's already allowed for private and vice versa.
I think it's normal for those other Shield Streaming ports to be closed until streaming actually starts, but 5354 should appear open while ShieldProxy.exe is running.
It is possible for me to (and I plan to) add some code to make the MDNS relay port configurable but I don't think that would solve your issue here.
EDIT: Also make sure you're testing 5354 (and other UDP ports) as UDP, not TCP. TCP 5354 is not the same as UDP 5354. In fact, you can host different services on the same ports on TCP and UDP at the same time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah good call out of my lack of attention to detail I forgot to run Shieldproxy.exe again after removing my router from the loop and rebooting everything. It appears to be working now. Unfortunately my Linksys E2000 with DD-WRT has been having major issues port forwarding but at least I know it's my router now and I can keep playing with it to get it working like I had to do with VPN.
Thanks!
v0.2 released
I've posted updated releases for Android and Windows on the GitHub projects. None of the changes in either version break compatibility with v0.1 so you can update them at separate times.
Android v0.2 Changelog:
- Fix several bugs preventing the "MDNS relay not running" warning from showing up consistently
- Tighten the check that determines whether the MDNS query will be forwarded
Windows v0.2 Changelog:
- Statically link to the VC++ runtime so installing the runtime isn't required anymore
- Tighten the check that determines whether the MDNS query will be forwarded
cgutman said:
From what it sounds like, the MDNS relay is working fine and the router is definitely configured correctly because you get video sometimes. I assume you also see the message in the ShieldProxy.exe console: "Shield is now communicating with us on port XXXXX".
If I had to speculate, I'd say it's related to high packet loss. Shield streaming (both on the network and through my proxy) use UDP for the video stream and a PPTP VPN uses GRE packets which are both lossy protocols, while Splashtop uses TCP which retransmits lost packets. It may be that the ISP is doing some QoS stuff that's causing non-TCP packets to be dropped at a higher rate, but this is complete speculation.
The Shield pings the streaming PC and the streaming PC sends back video data, but if the pings aren't reaching the streaming PC or the video isn't reaching the Shield, you get the dreaded "Streaming failed due to network interference ... etc" message.
The upside is that we can better troubleshoot the issue based on the output from the Windows Shield proxy. If you could paste that here, I could take a look (remove the last 2 octets of the IP addresses, so 192.168.1.1 becomes 192.168.X.X). Also if you would post what ISP you're using and where you were trying to connect from (whichever ones you feel comfortable mentioning).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you are right in regards to packet loss. I have Comcast at home, and have tried various providers (ATT LTE, ATT WIFI so far with this solution and VPN over some other WIFI networks). I will be testing it again in the next couple of days and will report back with the additional details requested. I have the ASUS NT-R66U router as well. Thanks for the reply and offer of assistance, really appreciated.
Cheers!
Finally had some time to play with this more than some quick tests. This seems to run so much smoother than my old VPN configuration.
I don't know if anyone else has experienced with this but even though it's running like almost perfectly smooth sometimes the connection just completely drops. VPN would have big lag spikes but would rarely drop me.
Edit: Hm not sure if this is normal but there seems to be a larger audio latency (> 200-300 ms) which wasn't as bad with VPN. If I go to a friends house instead of playing around at work I'll try hard wiring my shield to ethernet to see if that improves anything.
HobsonA said:
Finally had some time to play with this more than some quick tests. This seems to run so much smoother than my old VPN configuration.
I don't know if anyone else has experienced with this but even though it's running like almost perfectly smooth sometimes the connection just completely drops. VPN would have big lag spikes but would rarely drop me.
Edit: Hm not sure if this is normal but there seems to be a larger audio latency (> 200-300 ms) which wasn't as bad with VPN. If I go to a friends house instead of playing around at work I'll try hard wiring my shield to ethernet to see if that improves anything.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Glad to hear that it's smoother than VPN for you.
The Shield Relay is just the same Shield streaming traffic just sent over the Internet rather than your home network. This comes with benefits (speed) and drawbacks (lower reliability). Both of the oddities that you mention are probably related to packet loss, latency spikes, and routing changes that are more prevalent on the Internet than the average home network.
I suspect that the reason the stream drops during big lag spikes is because the lag spikes are due to packet loss or high latency. If the Shield's pings to the streaming PC get lost or arrive very late, the PC will timeout the stream, stop sending video, and the stream will drop.
The audio latency is probably due to variances in the latency and routing of the Internet. It's possible that the video packets and the audio packets take different paths through the Internet, so they can reach the Shield at different times. Normally the latency is close on a home network because there's only one route from your computer to your Shield, but the Internet can have tens or hundreds of routes to get your packets from point A to point B (sometimes even the route from A -> B is different than B -> A).
Nvidia could timestamp the audio and video packets so they can be played back at the same time, but that would force the Shield to delay displaying the video while it waits for the audio packets to come (and vice versa). Since this is a gaming feature, they probably don't want to introduce more latency.
ok how to know if everything if ok ?
ok how to know if everything if ok ? ?
i done everything like it write over here and i don't get any error just "stop" after i click run in the shield.
so everything working right?
Yosizach said:
ok how to know if everything if ok ? ?
i done everything like it write over here and i don't get any error just "stop" after i click run in the shield.
so everything working right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you see both lines like "Shield is now communicating with us on port XXXXX" and "Relaying MDNS traffic to XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX" on the Shield Proxy running on Windows?
cgutman said:
Do you see both lines like "Shield is now communicating with us on port XXXXX" and "Relaying MDNS traffic to XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX" on the Shield Proxy running on Windows?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dmm...no i don't see it ...this is what i get when i run the
ShieldProxy.exe
all i get is "shield streaming proxy for windows v0.2"
joined MDNS multicast group with interface 192.168.1.13 (my pc)
listening on Microsoft for shield traffic
relay is up and running..."
what i am doing wrong .. i open all the ports i have RT-AC66U so..
Yosizach said:
dmm...no i don't see it ...this is what i get when i run the
ShieldProxy.exe
all i get is "shield streaming proxy for windows v0.2"
joined MDNS multicast group with interface 192.168.1.13 (my pc)
listening on Microsoft for shield traffic
relay is up and running..."
what i am doing wrong .. i open all the ports i have RT-AC66U so..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does your PC show up as available in the TegraZone app with Shield Relay running on Windows and Android? The start button on the Android relay doesn't do anything other than just start the relay service in the background. You still need to use the TegraZone app to access streaming. If you see an error message saying "We haven't received any DNS responses. Is the Windows Shield Proxy running on your PC?" then check that ShieldProxy.exe is allowed through Windows Firewall on public and private networks.
Every night the Shield will lose its connection to the SMB shares that my home server is feeding media content to my Shield/Plex Server. I've used these same SMB shares on Kodi(XBMC) for years. They work, I verify that they are still working after Shield/Plex loses connectivity to them with other devices; all access the shares without issue.
A reboot will instantly reconnect the shield to the SMB shares without any configuration changes, only to be lost again the next day.
Any/all help greatly appreciated.
Create an account on geforce forums, send feedback from the shield's seetings, including your geforce forum nickname on it, and create a thread there to report this problem. This is probably a bug with the nvidia's smb client application specifically.
I've been working with an Nvidia rep via their nvidia.custhelp.com So far the rep has been pretty useless:
"This could be an issue related to the network configuration." Umm yeah, 13 other devices wired and wifi working flawlessly
"Unplug all the cables and keep the SHIELD ATV off for good 2-3 minutes. Plug the Power cable, Ethernet cable and the HDMI cable. See if the issue persists." I realize rep has a SOP checklist to go through... But it just exacerbates my frustration!
I'm considering just finding a way to auto-reboot nightly until a real fix has been released. That or just transfer my media to a large USB HDD, keep a mirror on server which will be an extra backup I guess.
I finally got another response from them. They re-asked me the same exact questions... So glad I asked for their assistance.
Did you ever figure this out? I am having the same problem.
No, I did not. Since the last update it happens less frequently, but it does still happen.
I'm building a new home server that I will be transferring my Plex server to once completed.
Hi there, I had the same problem with my Nvidia Shield TV, SMB didn't work propperly.
The solution that worked for me was:
In Windows I created a new local account. Then I shared the folders I wanted to share withe the new account. After that SMB (Samba) was working fine on the Shield (I had to enter the accountname and password of the new account in Kodi).
I have this problem as well with Synology NAS. Anyone else using Synology?
I have the same probleme but i find the answer. disconnect your server on remote access and never push claim server. My plex on my shield reconnect automatic.
I had similar issues and what helped for the last week (fingers crossed still) was (on my router):
- Wifi "Group Key Rotation Interval" set to 28800 (8 hours). Not sure if this is the main solution.
- "Force as Master Browser": Yes, this makes my router the netbios master browser (maintains list of network names), this might be the actual solution.
I have an asus router with merlin firmware
belledesire said:
I had similar issues and what helped for the last week (fingers crossed still) was (on my router):
- Wifi "Group Key Rotation Interval" set to 28800 (8 hours). Not sure if this is the main solution.
- "Force as Master Browser": Yes, this makes my router the netbios master browser (maintains list of network names), this might be the actual solution.
I have an asus router with merlin firmware
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry to bump this thread, but I have the exact same issue.
Plex on my Shield 2017 Pro will lose the connection it seems to my Synology NAS after 12-16 hours it seems.
Since I also have an ASUS with Merlin firmware, I was curious if your fix helped?
Hi everybody, I have a similar problem with my new nvidia shield tv pro (2017).
I successfully connect to my Synology NAS (DS214play) media share and get all my movies in PMS library. But after reboot the Shield, the SMB share is gone!
I can't play any movie, before I manually reconnect to NAS.
Furthermore while plex can't play any movie (it says that the files are not available) other applications like KODI or Network Browser work perfectly, ie they are able to see the folder in to the NAS.
Any news!!!!
g
Recently I requested assistance to NVIDIA Customer Care, and I show you their reply below:
-----------------
Hello Harish,
thank you too!
My NAS is connected by ethernet gigabit to the shield, and I have 2 HDD of 3Tb each connected as JBOD volume.
Best regards
Gianfranco
PS: if of interest I can act as betatester for larger disks, since I have ordered 2 HDD of 6Tb each for the Plex server on the new shield. After what you said, I’ll connect them has BASIC volume, do you agree?
Response By Email (Harish) (02/19/2017 10:41 AM)
Hello Gianfranco,
Thank you for the reply
This NAS is 8TB in size and it works on wireless technology, we recommend only maximum 4 TB HDD for this SHIELD TV and we have not tested wireless NAS device for the SHIELD and we cannot assure you that it will work, Please get in touch with us, if you need further assistance and I would be happy to help you
Best Regards,
Harish,
NVIDIA Customer Care
Customer By CSS Email (Gianfranco Camuncoli) (02/19/2017 10:16 AM)
Hello Harish,
the model is DS 214 play, you can see details below:
Synology DS 214 play
I can’t send a screen shot because today after a full reset the shield was definitively bricked.
I forget to tell you before that the shield it often freezed and that forced me to do a reset.
Best regards
Gianfranco
--------------------------------------------
Two things.
1. This is not happening to me since the 5.0 upgrade. Not sure if it is coincidence or not
2. Maybe more important, it is not happening since I reinstalled DDWRT on my router which performs a type of local dns, similar to WINS, but for all devices, windows computers, macs, androids, HDHomeRun, . So, when my Synology comes online as "SPACE", I can always "ping space" from any device and it "just works". It's kind of magic to me, as I used to build DNS forward and reverse services, DHCP servers, RAS gateways, RADIUS, and so on, etc. No idea how this works so well.
So, my R8000 router, (and my prior R7000) have these DDWRT settings
Use DNSMasq for DHCP
Use DNSMasq for DNS
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think these are what makes everything work amazingly.
So, for everyone with a NAS, can you just ping by the machine name?
If not, I think you will have to set you DHCP to fix the IP for certain devices, at least the NAS.