Edit: I had to enable port forwarding. I didn’t realize it was required.

Note: for some reason strikethrough isn’t working (otherwise, I’d apply it to the original question. Also, not sure if I should delete this post now that it is working, or leave it up in case other people have the same issue.

Does anyone know why qbittorrent would be showing 0 seeders if a tracker shows that there are several?

I am using Proton VPN and qbittorrent. The torrent file is from teamos [dot] xyz.

ProtonVPN settings:

  • Split tunneling enabled > Include mode > added app: qbittorrent
  • Connected to the Netherlands (Wireguard UDP)

qbitttorrent settings:

  • Network Interface set to ProtonVPN

Thank you

-

  • Meldrik@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I guess the tracker can see the seeders, but your client can’t connect to them maybe?

    • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Yeah my first guess was lack of port forwarding. If neither you, nor the other people are port forwarded then you can’t establish the connection.

      I’m curious if the torrent protocol could be updated to allow a Tailscale style NAT traversal so port forwarding wouldn’t even be needed. That would be a game changer, but would probably add wayyyyy too much overhead for the tracker to manage.

  • Mordikan@kbin.earth
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Pretty sure that is just a discrepancy between when a site has last checked client announcements from the tracker and when what the tracker currently shows. As of 2025, TPB for example links to 3.2 million torrents. Assuming client announcements were set to an average 1hr interval, that would require TPB to make 76.8 million checks every day for announcement updates.

    So, I could see sites not maintaining accurate seeder/leecher data.

  • Kairos@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Split tunneling for an app that wants to bind to the VPN interface? Are you sure that’s right?

        • Yourname942@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          15 hours ago

          you can tell the VPN what you want to include/exclude:

          Exclude mode: Selected apps and IP addresses are excluded from VPN connection, Include mode: Only selected apps and IP addresses connect via VPN, all other traffic is unprotected.

          • Kairos@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            15 hours ago

            Ohhh I read it backwards.

            Do you have port forwarding enabled? You might not be able to connect to the peers for the reason they don’t have an incoming port. They could also be fake peers as some trackers do that.

              • Kairos@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                10 hours ago

                Yep :3

                It took me a while to learn this but: peer to peer connections aren’t magic. You either need at least one open port for each connection, or a relay. Some things use UPNP for the further, turnservers are compatible with the latter. Signal for examples use both, with an option to always relay calls (only the turnsurver)