Astra 2F: Iberia & Balearics Discussion

[Huevos]

to pick up on the comment from radicaldoc on the loss of 2F
Has anyone managed to receive the 2F channels ( CH5 and its variants, CH4 HD, BBC1 HD wales + scotland) in spain in the past few days?

Yes.

Image 1: Astra 2F, channel 4Seven.
Image 2:An Astra 1N transponder for comparison.

 

[Huevos]

That's the techie stuff I needed to understand how and why it works, if you read the changelog for the plugin you find that those users who are detected to have ip addresses outside of the UK are routed using TUNLR if the server/player in question doesn't allow a direct connection.

TUNLR just means using TUNLR's nameservers as your resolving DNS. Works just the same as any other resolving DNS. The stream itself is direct and doesn't pass through any VPN or proxy server. Anyway as all this happens in the background there's not really any point us worrying about it.

 

[Juan69]

I am getting all Freesat except for the 5 cluster; but only on the 140 dish. Nothing on the others.

 

[joddle]

I'm also getting all the Ch5 cluster just fine - no change at all since 2f went on air for me. Just tried it 5 mins ago to be sure but all fine.

 

[Ricardo Servet]

TUNLR just means using TUNLR's nameservers as your resolving DNS. Works just the same as any other resolving DNS. The stream itself is direct and doesn't pass through any VPN or proxy server. Anyway as all this happens in the background there's not really any point us worrying about it.

Proxies are typically used for the negotiation, they are not usually used for the stream, whatever the device.

So, for those with ip addresses that are detected as not being in the UK nothing much is different with TUNLR (which does use a proxy for non uk ip addresses).

The primary cause for concern would be if the device you are using to access the content is one that needs to be secure.

DNS Tunnelling and proxies have security concerns which are acknowledged by the TUNLR site, and there they also advocate methods to alleviate those concerns.

Beyond that the DNS is not "just the same". TUNLR DNS will slow down domain name resolution for non media applications, deliberately so as they explain on their site, to discourage folk from using their servers for general DNS.

You are right that on a linux box which is only used for media there is less to worry about than if the linux (or other) device is being used for other things on the net.

I'm not saying that TUNLR is bad, just that folk should be aware that when they change a configuration like a DNS setting or use a proxy they are making changes which have other potential impacts.

 

[Huevos]

I'm not saying that TUNLR is bad, just that folk should be aware that when they change a configuration like a DNS setting or use a proxy they are making changes which have other potential impacts.

Like what? Also it is not a proxy. It is just a resolving DNS, used when necessary, not otherwise. Having the records held in the hosts file would have the same effect.

 

[Huevos]

I'm also getting all the Ch5 cluster just fine - no change at all since 2f went on air for me. Just tried it 5 mins ago to be sure but all fine.

Juan is a good 200km further south than you. From Alicante going south 2F signal drops dramatically.

Juan do you want help to try to get that 1.4m receiving C5?

 

[Juan69]

Huevos thank you for the offer. I am not missing it that much and I am sort of hooked on internet access, so I am getting my fix of "Five" that way.
A bigger dish would probably do it but as things are up there, it is probably worth waiting until the satellite situation is resolved.

 

[Huevos]

Did two 1.4m Famaval offset dishes today.

Balsicas, Murcia, 37.8187, -0.9566,
10964 H 8.1dB,
10773 H 10.6dB (Astra 1N transponder for reference).

Playa Flamenca, Orihuela Costa, 37.9323, -0.7259,
10964 H 9.2dB,
10773 H 10.6dB (Astra 1N transponder for reference).

This is less than 25km going south west. Demonstrates abrupt roll-off towards the edge of the footprint.

 

[Ricardo Servet]

Like what? Also it is not a proxy. It is just a resolving DNS, used when necessary, not otherwise. Having the records held in the hosts file would have the same effect.

Apologies for the delay in replying, just got back from a business trip.

At hxxp://tunlr.net/status/ TUNLR gives a report such as....

Proxy server (United States) status
Proxy server (United Kingdom) status
Proxy server (Continental Europe 1) status
Proxy server (Continental Europe 2) status

I don't know precisely how TUNLR does what it does, but it's clear that it admits using proxies.

On their FAQ they say... "Tunlr is a DNS (domain name system) unblocking service. We’re using sophisticated technologies (a.k.a. the Tunlr Secret Sauce ©) to re-adress certain data envelopes"

And since I'm not privy to the internal workings of their systems, what it does has to be taken on trust, which obviously has risks and security implications, which they also advise of in their FAQ where they say...

"For speed, stability, privacy and security reasons we do not recommend to permanently set your computer’s or router’s DNS addresses to Tunlr"

I'd go further and advise of a potential risk even in temporarily changing to their DNS.

To give a rather poor analogy....

You might leave your back door open briefly because a trusted Aunt said she would drop by, but you would be aware that when doing so you were leaving the door open in a way that would allow others to enter more easily.

If a bad boy snuck in and hid while your Aunt was visiting, you might not notice any mischief he got up to after the Aunt's visit was over.

......If you change the DNS servers on a device, then you are not just changing DNS for the site (internet location) that you want to affect, you are also giving the new resolving DNS server the opportunity to translate any requests your device makes. So such a change could potentially affect domain name resolution for banking, system updates etcetera.

This is probably not a concern for a device that is only used for watching television, via an internet connection that is not used for any other purposes.

But it could be a concern if the device is your personal computer used for important stuff, or if the device is connected to a networked device that does access secure sites and data.

The security impact is surely obvious. For example, if your device were to ask for a bank web site, the dns resolver could direct it to an ip address that is pretending to be the bank web site (perfect for phishing). This is also how modifications to host files can have similar potential security implications and why firewalls and antivirus software typically try to lock access to host files..

So, my original point is valid. Users should be aware of the potential dangers when making system changes or using any software that makes such changes for them.

If you use such a service or software it would be wise to do so only on a device which is not used for anything that might be affected by potential security breaches. It might also be wise to isolate that device from the rest of your network.

Once again, I did not say that TUNLR (or any software that uses it) is currently doing anything bad, just that it could do so in a way that you would be unaware of if you had granted your device permission to use such software, or changed your dns resolution service away from your usual trusted service.

 

[Huevos]

If you change the DNS servers on a device, then you are not just changing DNS for the site (internet location) that you want to affect, you are also giving the new resolving DNS server the opportunity to translate any requests your device makes

No, that is not true in this case. The Linux receiver continues to uses its default resolving nameserver for all operations. The only time TUNLR is used is only when necessary and only by some of the modules of the OnDemand plugin. This is completely different than using TUNLR as a default resolving nameserver on a PC. But anyway in the end you have to trust some resolving nameserver at some level otherwise you could never use the internet. And as far as your comments about your bank website, even if the DNS had been subject to poisoning and you had been diverted to a fake site, the SSL certificate wouldn't correspond or be verified and the browser would show a notice to this effect. Anyway we seem to be getting way off topic here.

 

[Ricardo Servet]

The TUNLR system used by the Linux plug-in uses a DNS tunneling protocol and accesses proxy servers in the USA, UK and Europe to allow access to various services including Netflix, BBC et al.

You can use TUNLR direct with lots of other internet connected devices providing you are happy to live with any security implications of DNS tunneling and proxies on the device in question.

No, that is not true in this case. The Linux receiver continues to uses its default resolving nameserver for all operations. The only time TUNLR is used is only when necessary and only by some of the modules of the OnDemand plugin. This is completely different than using TUNLR as a default resolving nameserver on a PC. But anyway in the end you have to trust some resolving nameserver at some level otherwise you could never use the internet. And as far as your comments about your bank website, even if the DNS had been subject to poisoning and you had been diverted to a fake site, the SSL certificate wouldn't correspond or be verified and the browser would show a notice to this effect. Anyway we seem to be getting way off topic here.

I agree that using TUNLR direct and the Linux plug-in on a dedicated Linux box are completely different, and that is what I've been saying all along.

Since the 29th March I've been discussing using TUNLR direct, and it seems to me you've been answering me as though I am discussing the Linux plug in on a Linux box.

If you use TUNLR direct you would be changing DNS for everything while you used it. So you should be aware of the security implications before you do that.

And there is no way of predicting the effect of any nasty little gremlins that might have snuck in while you have deliberately lowered your defenses. You could no longer assume that anything, including your browser software, would behave properly and give you appropriate security warnings.

If I had a dedicated receiver using the Linux software/plug-in, then as I've repeatedly stated, the security concerns would not be an issue for me, because it would not be doing anything but get Satellite TV.

But if I use TUNLR direct on "other" devices, my defenses are down on said device.

 

[Huevos]

If you use TUNLR direct you would be changing DNS for everything while you used it. So you should be aware of the security implications

That's a "straw man" in the context of this plugin. And anyway just because typical behaviour of a windows PC is that DNS is a system wide setting that doesn't have to be the case. If you write your own software (as is the case with the plugin) DNS can be applied on a case by case basis. And as I said above any resolving DNS can be poisoned, and it is far more likely this would happen to your ISP's resolving DNS than TUNLR due to the success rate the poisoner would have.

 

[Lazarus]

Gentlemen, your side-debate deserves a Topic of its own if you intend to continue in this vein.

 

[Ricardo Servet]

Gentlemen, your side-debate deserves a Topic of its own if you intend to continue in this vein.

I agree and I'll happily discuss Open DNS and the need for caution with secretive private DNS if anyone wants to discuss it.
I have no interest in arguing about a Linux plug-in that I've already stated I'm not discussing, and I was not setting up a straw man by simply not discussing that at all.

 

[roberto mafara]

Here in Pedreguer Ch5 is stronger than in Murcia
10964 H 10.20 db
10773 H 10.63 db

@Huevos I like your skin is the from a Vu+ box????

 

[joddle]

Here in Pedreguer Ch5 is stronger than in Murcia
10964 H 10.20 db
10773 H 10.63 db

@Huevos I like your skin is the from a Vu+ box????

Hi Robi - I am thinking of putting a 1.2M PF dish (as I have one spare here) up at our villa in Javea, how reliable is the reception on your kit? I notice you are using an old Pace,2600C I do likewise here in Valencia but am thinking of a Fressat box for the villa.

 

[Huevos]

Here in Pedreguer Ch5 is stronger than in Murcia
10964 H 10.20 db
10773 H 10.63 db

@Huevos I like your skin is the from a Vu+ box????

From Alicante going north those transponders are almost equal, but 10773H is one of the worst transponders on 1N due to the co-channel from Badr5. For example 10778V and 10818V are a good 1.5dB SNR stronger.

@robi62, yes, those screenies are from a Vu+ Ultimo, OpenViX image, ViX-Day-HD skin. Image works fantastic and looks identical on all the receivers it runs on.

@Joddle, you can get 2F on a 90cm dish in Javea so a 1.2m is going to be fine. I've fitted quite a few 120 x 110cm offset dishes in Javea and SNR on these on 10964H is always around 9.6dB which is plenty for anything but torrential rain.

 

[roberto mafara]

@Joddle hi i dont use pace anymore I have a dm800 which is better for fringe as pull in a stronger signal and also I just bought a vu duo twin hd but reception not as good as dm800 but still get all the channels at the mo

@huevos yes i realised it was a vix image I just intalled in on my vu duo although I have always used Openpli on my boxes

We just have to wait and see what happens in July.........

 

[Huevos]

2F even stronger, North Costa Blanca. Did a job in Xativa. 120 x 110cm dish. 10964H = 11.0dB SNR, compared to 9.6dB on 10773H.