Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

socket error #11004 solved

399 views
Skip to first unread message

blake murphy

unread,
Jul 14, 2009, 10:32:01 AM7/14/09
to
well, i subscribed to usenet-news and got the same error message when
trying to download all groups. so i wrote an e-mail to the usenet-news
describing the problem, and they wrote back saying to use the i.p. address
(which they provided) instead of the server name, which solved the problem.

(responded within a couple hours, too - pretty good service to a
three-dollar customer.)

(posted in case someone googles the group for answers)

thanks to you who tried to help me, and thanks also to you called me all
those fine names.

your pal,
blake

VanguardLH

unread,
Jul 15, 2009, 10:17:09 PM7/15/09
to
blake murphy wrote:

> well, i subscribed to usenet-news and got the same error message when
> trying to download all groups.

So is "usenet-news" some other NNTP provider than Motzarella which was
the NNTP source in the original thread? Or are you now talking about
and you switched to usenet.com or usenet-news.com?

> so i wrote an e-mail to the usenet-news describing the problem, and
> they wrote back saying to use the i.p. address (which they provided)
> instead of the server name, which solved the problem.

When you do a DNS lookup on the IP name, what IP address comes back?
Does "nslookup <ipname>" return their IP address?


>
> (responded within a couple hours, too - pretty good service to a
> three-dollar customer.)

Then you can't be talking about Motzarella since they charge NOTHING to
use their NNTP service. For Motzy, all you have to do is register and
that is free. So you switched to a different NNTP provider.

> (posted in case someone googles the group for answers)

So why not add your post as a reply to the previous existing thread?
How would a fix for usenet-news.com help with the error at Motzarella?

VanguardLH

unread,
Jul 15, 2009, 10:26:55 PM7/15/09
to
Oops, I see in your first sentence that you said "I subscribed to
usenet-news" so you did switch from Motzy. I don't see how using an IP
address instead of an IP name would get rid of the socket error.
Sockets are negotiated between the end points (client and server hosts).
When you connect to the server host, you have already converted their IP
name to an IP address. Humans like names. Computers only use numbers.
Once you connected to their site, only IP addresses were involved. The
DNS lookup is long gone and not any part of the connection between your
host and their host.

By using an IP address, I'm wondering if there was something on your own
host that was blocking the URL (with the IP name) for the target host,
like some ad-blocker, filter, apps rule in a HIPS security program, or
in a firewall. Using an IP address let you get past some filtering on
your own host.

That "it" (using an IP address) fixed the problem with 2 different NNTP
providers and that you don't connect using IP names and only with IP
addresses sure seems to point to a problem that still exists on your
host.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_Name_System
Domain Name System
"it translates domain names meaningful to humans into the numerical
(binary) identifiers associated with networking equipment for the
purpose of locating and addressing these devices world-wide"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_socket
Internet socket
"A socket address is the combination of an IP *address* (the location of
the computer) and a port (which is mapped to the application program
process)"

blake murphy

unread,
Jul 16, 2009, 9:05:51 AM7/16/09
to
On Wed, 15 Jul 2009 21:26:55 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

> Oops, I see in your first sentence that you said "I subscribed to
> usenet-news" so you did switch from Motzy.

yes, exactly.

>I don't see how using an IP
> address instead of an IP name would get rid of the socket error.

don't know why, either, but it most certainly did. i stopped thinking
about the whys and wherefores as soon as it started working.

> Sockets are negotiated between the end points (client and server hosts).
> When you connect to the server host, you have already converted their IP
> name to an IP address. Humans like names. Computers only use numbers.
> Once you connected to their site, only IP addresses were involved. The
> DNS lookup is long gone and not any part of the connection between your
> host and their host.
>
> By using an IP address, I'm wondering if there was something on your own
> host that was blocking the URL (with the IP name) for the target host,
> like some ad-blocker, filter, apps rule in a HIPS security program, or
> in a firewall. Using an IP address let you get past some filtering on
> your own host.
>

i do not know if verizon was doing something squirrelly or not. i was not
about to call them to ask about it, which would almost certainly involve
explaining to some tech guy was 'usenet' means.

i have no firewall on my machine.

your pal,
blake

VanguardLH

unread,
Jul 16, 2009, 2:00:46 PM7/16/09
to
blake murphy wrote:

> VanguardLH wrote:

>>I don't see how using an IP
>> address instead of an IP name would get rid of the socket error.
>
> don't know why, either, but it most certainly did. i stopped thinking
> about the whys and wherefores as soon as it started working.
>
>> Sockets are negotiated between the end points (client and server hosts).
>> When you connect to the server host, you have already converted their IP
>> name to an IP address. Humans like names. Computers only use numbers.
>> Once you connected to their site, only IP addresses were involved. The
>> DNS lookup is long gone and not any part of the connection between your
>> host and their host.
>>
>> By using an IP address, I'm wondering if there was something on your own
>> host that was blocking the URL (with the IP name) for the target host,
>> like some ad-blocker, filter, apps rule in a HIPS security program, or
>> in a firewall. Using an IP address let you get past some filtering on
>> your own host.
>>
> i do not know if verizon was doing something squirrelly or not. i was not
> about to call them to ask about it, which would almost certainly involve
> explaining to some tech guy was 'usenet' means.
>
> i have no firewall on my machine.


While I am using Albasani, I was using Motzy before and left the
definition for their NNTP server in 40tude Dialog. However, I didn't
want Dialog getting new headers and their bodies from Motzy after
switching to Albasani. Dialog doesn't let you disable a server
definition, so I had to alter the IP name. I changed it to:

news.eternal-september.o-r-g

Notice the TLD (top-level domain) is invalid. That means Dialog will
never be able to find that host. The result is that Dialog reports the
#11004 socket error message. Anytime it cannot get back an IP address
from a DNS lookup has it issue this error message.

Because Dialog issues that error message when the DNS lookup fails makes
me wonder if you have the proper IP name (hostname) specified in your
instance of Dialog for the NNTP server. If the IP name is wrong then
the DNS lookup will fail (or give you an IP address for the wrongly
specified host and you connect to somewhere you did not mean to
connect). I suspect you don't have Dialog properly configured to use
the correct hostname for Motzy's NNTP server, some security software is
interfering with the DNS request that you issue and expect to get back
the correct IP address, or the DNS server you are using is returning an
error that it couldn't find that hostname.

Using an IP address eliminates the DNS lookup. Computers always use IP
addresses (numbers) so there is no problem in connectivity across the
network to the target host. The problem is an error with the DNS
lookup.

Sqwertz

unread,
Jul 16, 2009, 11:25:42 PM7/16/09
to
On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 14:32:01 GMT, blake murphy wrote:

> well, i subscribed to usenet-news and got the same error message when
> trying to download all groups. so i wrote an e-mail to the usenet-news
> describing the problem, and they wrote back saying to use the i.p. address
> (which they provided) instead of the server name, which solved the problem.

I'm using U-N as well now and I keep getting spurious Authentication
Errors.

Don't have time to research it but let me know if you get them as
well.

I'm also getting "Program Error or Timeout" when spending too much
time composing a post. I think I've adjusted my keepalive to
prevent this, but I'm still curious about the spurious Auth errors
(using Dialog).

> thanks to you who tried to help me, and thanks also to you called me all
> those fine names.

Thanks for the followup. Asshole.

-sw

blake murphy

unread,
Jul 17, 2009, 11:27:58 AM7/17/09
to

nope, the hostname was correct when i tried motzerella and correct when i
tried usenet-news. that was the first thing i checked.

> Using an IP address eliminates the DNS lookup. Computers always use IP
> addresses (numbers) so there is no problem in connectivity across the
> network to the target host. The problem is an error with the DNS
> lookup.

obviously. but i could not see where that error was occurring, so i asked
for help.

blake

blake murphy

unread,
Jul 17, 2009, 11:31:21 AM7/17/09
to
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 22:25:42 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:

> On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 14:32:01 GMT, blake murphy wrote:
>
>> well, i subscribed to usenet-news and got the same error message when
>> trying to download all groups. so i wrote an e-mail to the usenet-news
>> describing the problem, and they wrote back saying to use the i.p. address
>> (which they provided) instead of the server name, which solved the problem.
>
> I'm using U-N as well now and I keep getting spurious Authentication
> Errors.
>

i haven't had those problems, but i do have the usename and password in the
server/identity box.

> Don't have time to research it but let me know if you get them as
> well.
>
> I'm also getting "Program Error or Timeout" when spending too much
> time composing a post. I think I've adjusted my keepalive to
> prevent this, but I'm still curious about the spurious Auth errors
> (using Dialog).
>

that hasn't happened to me, though as you know, most of my posts are short.

>> thanks to you who tried to help me, and thanks also to you called me all
>> those fine names.
>
> Thanks for the followup. Asshole.
>
> -sw

mr. asshole to you.

your pal,
blake

Sqwertz

unread,
Jul 18, 2009, 11:43:29 AM7/18/09
to
On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 14:32:01 GMT, blake murphy wrote:

> well, i subscribed to usenet-news and got the same error message when
> trying to download all groups. so i wrote an e-mail to the usenet-news
> describing the problem, and they wrote back saying to use the i.p. address
> (which they provided) instead of the server name, which solved the problem.

I just got around to looking at my problem.

I was using .com instead of .org. Duh. That was easy.

-sw

VanguardLH

unread,
Jul 20, 2009, 12:57:02 AM7/20/09
to
blake murphy wrote:

When you run "nslookup <ipname>" on the server's hostnames, do you get
back the same IP address they told you to use?

blake murphy

unread,
Jul 20, 2009, 9:31:38 AM7/20/09
to

i did not do that, because i didn't know there was sometimes an issue
using the (correct) hostname.

i did a google on the error message the same day i e-mailed usenet-news,
and there were a few sites that hinted in direction, so that was to be the
next step. but before i got around to that, usenet-news responded. and
everyone lived happily forever after, expect for a few people on this
group.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy

unread,
Jul 20, 2009, 9:32:33 AM7/20/09
to

oopsie. you get points for admitting it, though.

your pal,
blake

Sqwertz

unread,
Jul 20, 2009, 10:54:15 PM7/20/09
to
On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 13:32:33 GMT, blake murphy wrote:

> On Sat, 18 Jul 2009 10:43:29 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 14:32:01 GMT, blake murphy wrote:
>>
>>> well, i subscribed to usenet-news and got the same error message when
>>> trying to download all groups. so i wrote an e-mail to the usenet-news
>>> describing the problem, and they wrote back saying to use the i.p. address
>>> (which they provided) instead of the server name, which solved the problem.
>>
>> I just got around to looking at my problem.
>>
>> I was using .com instead of .org. Duh. That was easy.
>

> oopsie. you get points for admitting it, though.

That was for Motzarella. For Usenet-News.org I swiched to
eu.usenet-news.org and not only am I getting quicker response times,
but my authentication errors and "connection timed out" problems
disappeared.

-sw

VanguardLH

unread,
Jul 20, 2009, 11:17:31 PM7/20/09
to
blake murphy wrote:

Okay, but I figured you might want to fix whatever was the DNS problem
on your end (on your host or with whomever's DNS server you are using).
It is unlikely that the DNS problem would be isolated to just that IP
name.

VanguardLH

unread,
Jul 20, 2009, 11:33:16 PM7/20/09
to
Sqwertz wrote:

> That was for Motzarella. For Usenet-News.org I swiched to
> eu.usenet-news.org and not only am I getting quicker response times,
> but my authentication errors and "connection timed out" problems
> disappeared.

Except that you are now posting through AIOE (Netherlands), not through
usenet-news.org (California, USA).

Disable any NNTP interrogation by your anti-virus/malware programs and
retest to see if the timeouts disappear.

Also, Motzy is on a different continent than you. Undersea cables are
still used in the Internet mess network and those incur a long delay.
If you do a traceroute from you to the target host, you would see there
is a huge increase in delay at some point. Motzy is in Germany. You
are in the US.

When I do a traceroute to AIOE, there is a big jump in delay when my
route hops over the ocean. There is a similar big jump in delay when my
route hops over the ocean to Motzarella (although a bit shorter than for
AIOE). You didn't mentioned if you were having problems with AIOE, only
with Motzarella. Now that you're using usenet-news.org, you're
accessing an NNTP server on the same continent as you so there is no
huge jump in delay in your route.

Message has been deleted

VanguardLH

unread,
Jul 21, 2009, 1:05:54 AM7/21/09
to
Rom wrote:

> VanguardLH wrote:
>
>> Also, Motzy is on a different continent than you. Undersea cables are
>> still used in the Internet mess network and those incur a long delay.
>> If you do a traceroute from you to the target host, you would see there
>> is a huge increase in delay at some point. Motzy is in Germany. You
>> are in the US.
>>
>> When I do a traceroute to AIOE, there is a big jump in delay when my
>> route hops over the ocean. There is a similar big jump in delay when my
>> route hops over the ocean to Motzarella (although a bit shorter than for
>> AIOE). You didn't mentioned if you were having problems with AIOE, only
>> with Motzarella. Now that you're using usenet-news.org, you're
>> accessing an NNTP server on the same continent as you so there is no
>> huge jump in delay in your route.
>

> LOL Don't move to, say, Australia where most of the Internet is on a
> different continent, are likely using undersea cables (like SXC),
> where traceroutes usually show a big jump to anywhere overseas, and
> broadband (cable/ADSL) can seem like dialup to European news servers.

It is if you have a large number of packet loss which means the retries
for those lost packets incurs a longer delay which can lead to a
timeout. Motzy responds to pings, so you could run:

ping -n 25 news.eternal-september.org

(the default of 4 pings is way too small a sample) to get an idea of how
much loss, if any, you had.

Along with the cumulative delay due to packet retries over a route with
a big delay and with the added delay imposed by interrogation of NNTP
traffic by an anti-virus program can result in timeouts.

> A big jump isn't necessarily a problem in itself.

I wasn't aware that I made an absolute statement. It can be causative
factor in timeouts. I wasn't going to write an encyclopedia of network
troubleshooting within a single reply post.

Message has been deleted

VanguardLH

unread,
Jul 21, 2009, 4:48:08 AM7/21/09
to
Rom wrote:

> On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 00:05:54 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:
>
>> Rom wrote:
>>
>>> VanguardLH wrote:
>>>
>>>> Also, Motzy is on a different continent than you. Undersea cables are
>>>> still used in the Internet mess network and those incur a long delay.
>>>> If you do a traceroute from you to the target host, you would see there
>>>> is a huge increase in delay at some point. Motzy is in Germany. You
>>>> are in the US.
>>>>
>>>> When I do a traceroute to AIOE, there is a big jump in delay when my
>>>> route hops over the ocean. There is a similar big jump in delay when my
>>>> route hops over the ocean to Motzarella (although a bit shorter than for
>>>> AIOE). You didn't mentioned if you were having problems with AIOE, only
>>>> with Motzarella. Now that you're using usenet-news.org, you're
>>>> accessing an NNTP server on the same continent as you so there is no
>>>> huge jump in delay in your route.
>>>
>>> LOL Don't move to, say, Australia where most of the Internet is on a
>>> different continent, are likely using undersea cables (like SXC),
>>> where traceroutes usually show a big jump to anywhere overseas, and
>>> broadband (cable/ADSL) can seem like dialup to European news servers.
>>
>> It is if you have a large number of packet loss
>

> I'm in Australia and don't have packet loss, but have a big jump to
> start with to even get to the US (say, 170ms), then across the US
> before another big jump to EU (say, 330ms), compared to under 20ms to
> an ISP news server in AU. Having to cross the pond with a big jump to
> start with is normal here, let alone additional continent jumps, and
> why it can feel like dialup to European news servers here.

Ouch!

blake murphy

unread,
Jul 21, 2009, 11:08:33 AM7/21/09
to

well, there didn't seem to be a problem with the hostnames for verizon or
teranews.

but since it's not my profession (though i am an ex-mainframe dinosaur),
when it started working the question became moot. i hope to god not to be
adding another usenet server anytime soon.

so, intellectual sloth, yes, but sloth is my favorite deadly sin because it
requires no special equipment.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy

unread,
Jul 21, 2009, 11:12:09 AM7/21/09
to

that's interesting. is usenet dying even faster in europe (i.e., fewer
users)?

your pal,
blake

_...@jeff_relf.seattle.invalid

unread,
Jul 21, 2009, 11:39:26 AM7/21/09
to
Only a crappy ISP would offer Usenet, eMail, or file hosting.
The best ISPs are a line to the Internet, nothing more.

I've been a regular on Usenet since 1991,
never have I seen so many good/cheap ways to access Usenet.

Thanks to Google Groups, even the homeless have access to Usenet.
Google rocks ―― my posts are at Google.COM, indexed:

Google.COM/search?q="Jeff_Relf"|"Jeff Relf"&sitesearch=google.com&as_qdr=d
Google.COM/groups?q="Jeff_Relf"|"Jeff Relf"&sitesearch=google.com&scoring=d

0 new messages