locked
Extremely slow P2P between networks (NAT) RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hi. I have been trying out Live Mesh and Live Sync for the past couple of days and i am pleasantly suprised by both products.

    However i have had some problems with the synchronization speed in Mesh. My computers are located in separate networks both using NAT, which is probably why the speed is very slow, i suspect that the NAT-traversal is Mesh is very bad, or nonexistant, instead relaying the traffic through Microsoft. Synchronizing files in P2P mode is extremely slow compared to Live Sync which is very fast. I have read somewhere that Mesh uses ports 30000-40000 in the firewall for P2P traffic, but forwarding there ports does not have any effect, the mesh client probably announces its private NAT'ed address, making P2P impossible. I have not tested Synchronizing within the same network, but i have heard that P2P works better in those cases,

    If i am correct in my assumptions, i would like some configuration in Mesh for manually setting the public IP-address and port range for P2P connections, it may solve the speed problems.
    Thursday, March 18, 2010 11:16 AM

Answers

  • P2P via the Internet is slow with Live Mesh. Since you see good results with Live Sync, stick with that for now as the rumor is that both Live Sync and Live Mesh will merge in a future release of the Live services.
    If you wish to suggest anything for future consideration:
     

     

    Live Mesh Beta: Suggestions - Go cast your vote!

    -steve


    ~ Microsoft MVP Windows Live ~ Windows Live OneCare| Live Mesh|MS Security Essentials Forums Moderator ~
    Thursday, March 18, 2010 12:35 PM
    Moderator

All replies

  • P2P via the Internet is slow with Live Mesh. Since you see good results with Live Sync, stick with that for now as the rumor is that both Live Sync and Live Mesh will merge in a future release of the Live services.
    If you wish to suggest anything for future consideration:
     

     

    Live Mesh Beta: Suggestions - Go cast your vote!

    -steve


    ~ Microsoft MVP Windows Live ~ Windows Live OneCare| Live Mesh|MS Security Essentials Forums Moderator ~
    Thursday, March 18, 2010 12:35 PM
    Moderator
  • Thanks for the reply, yes i will probably stick with Live Sync. However the 20000 file limit per folder limitation in Live Sync is bugging me, i need to split my pictures in separate folders for instance.

    I really like the nice integrated Live Mesh interface into windows, so i keep my eyes on Mesh in the future.
    Thursday, March 18, 2010 12:52 PM
  • I don't know how the merger of the two products will play out, but that limit is a tough one for folders wth lots of files.
    -steve
    ~ Microsoft MVP Windows Live ~ Windows Live OneCare| Live Mesh|MS Security Essentials Forums Moderator ~
    Thursday, March 18, 2010 2:47 PM
    Moderator