Can I setup ssh via TCP port forwarding?

I want to use LabVIEW to run commands on some Unix systems via ssh from a Mac OS X system (which has ssh built into the terminal). The command I sent (from the terminal) was 'ssh -L 1234:localhost:22 [email protected]'. Then I run LV (using the TCP example on port 1234), & the only message I get back is 'SSH-2.0-3.2.0 SSH Secure Shell (non-commercial)'. Does anyone know if this is a syntax error on my part or a LabVIEW limitation?
My other two ideas to tackle this problem were: A) use putty for unix and compile it to run on OS X (I think it can be done but it looked like a lot of work) B) use the system_exec.vi and send commands. The main problem with B is that I can only send 1 command per terminal session so it may get difficult to manage - this wouldn't be an issue if the system_exec let you retarget the same window/terminal session.
Any help is much appreciated!!!

I think the following KB is exactly what you're looking for:
KB 2VD8R0EV: How Can I Use the SSH TCP Communications Protocol With National Instruments Software?
Good luck.
Kileen

Similar Messages

Can anyone tell me how to port forward and setup an XBOX 360 using my Time Capsule??

Xbox 360
When playing the game online, the minimum speed of your network should be 128kbps. The ideal network speed for playing the game online is 768kbps. If you are having a problems with lag check the following:
Network Troubleshooting:
Disable any firewall or security features on your router.
Set port forwarding on your router to the IP address of your Xbox 360. This game uses port 3074 (UDP/TCP). Additionally Xbox LIVE requires ports 80, 53 TCP and 88, 53 UDP.
Place your Xbox 360 into the DMZ of your router.
Disconnect your router and try the game. If it works regularly at this point something about your router may not be completely compatible with the specific needs of this game. Check with your router manufacturer and Microsoft's Xbox Live Connection Issues page for additional steps that may need to be done to resolve the issue you are having. You can also verify that you have an Xbox Live compatible router.
If you are having issues connecting while multiple Xbox 360 consoles are connected on the same network, try forwarding port 3074 (UDP/TCP) for one Xbox 360 and setting the other as DMZ. There is a chance that this may not resolve you issue, if it doesn’t then you may want to consider getting an additional public IP address by contacting your Internet Service Provider and assigning it to one of these two consoles.
NOTE: If setting port forwarding or DMZ helps your connection issue, you may want to assign your Xbox 360 a static IP address within your home network. This can help to ensure that the configurations you made do not need to be done again. You can visit PortForward's Static IP Guide for a detailed guide on how to do this.
NOTE: Many broadband internet modems are coming with routing capabilities built in. Please contact your internet service provider to determine if your internet modem has an integrated router. If it does, they should be able to assist you with the steps above for setting up your router.
Once you have verified that your network setup is not the cause of the issue, try the following:
Try connecting to a different server. Some servers may have other players connected to them that you do not have an optimal connection with. In most games this is accomplished by backing out to the main menu and then selecting multiplayer again. From there you can try connecting to another online game.
Run the Xbox Network Self Test to see how strong your NAT is currently set to. Once the test is completed you will be notified if there is an issue with your connection. If you select "More Info" you will be given information about your NAT type and some steps to resolve any issues with your connection.
Moderate and Strict NAT types may have issues connecting to online matches. You may get the error "Notice - The game session is no longer available." If you do then enabling UPnP, forwarding port 3074, or placing your Xbox in your router's DMZ may resolve this issue. Please consult your router documentation for instructions on how to do this.

ouman88 wrote:
Whoa....this just went way over my head.... I already have 6.1 installed for my Airport Utility.
Read again what I wrote.. 6.1 is the problem.. or part of it.
You need to install the earlier 5.6 version which I have given you explicit instructions to do.
I have done something now and can not connect the XBOX at all now....unless you can provide me step by step directions I may have to call Apple Support.
This will happen over and over.. just press reset and start again.. you need to learn how to do the setup and using 5.6 utility will help you.. as will using ethernet from the computer to the TC.. trying to fix things over wireless is like sitting on a tree branch you are sawing off. As soon as you update you will fall to the ground.
I am not that sure that Apple Support will have any idea.
Do a google search .. you will find most people struggle with this.. Microsoft made the xbox to use upnp with vista specs.. if you use a router without upnp, ie any apple router.. you will have issues.
Have a go at bypassing the problem.. I have no idea if this will work.. I do not use a TC as the main router because much of my network including xbox and ps3 is just a pain.. I use a modem router with upnp. And bridge the TC.. that is the setup I would recommend.
Try this.. once you have installed 5.6 utility.
Get the IP of the XBox and click enable default host.. and put the IP address in there.. this is called DMZ.. all unassigned packets are forwarded to this ip address.. it is like a port forwarding for all ports.
See if it helps.. If it does you will need to lock the xbox address so it doesn't change.. we can get to that.
Tell me what kind of broadband you have and what modem router first.. none of this will work if you have double NAT.

Can no longer connect via serial port

Hi all,
I am an administrator for forty-eight Solaris servers scattered around the world, I have remote console connectivty via Cisco 2821 terminal servers. Recently all the devices were moved to new terminal servers but I can no longer get remote console connectivity to fourteen of them. Most of the servers just give a blank line. I have had the port and cable changed on two of them with no joy. One of the servers was local so I risked a reboot (didn't fancy rebooting one of the distant ones as hands-and-eyes support staff are difficult to get hold of and these are production boxes.). While connected via IP I attempted a reboot, after 20minutes of waiting I decided I'd have to connect directly with my laptop, when I connected the machine was waiting for an ilom login. After logging in and completing the boot the server was working fine and I could connect via the terminal server.
The boxes are Sun 5220's and I am running Solaris 10.
Any help would be greatfully received as I really don't fancy trying to reboot the other thirteen boxes with nobody onsite...
Cheers,
Mark T.

Answered my own question:
opened another terminal window and used the command killall ssh to abort the previous session.
Still don't know why it won't login to my server.

Can I setup a rule to auto forward or move messages in Microsoft Outlook Web Access for Firefox?

I am using Firefox 5.0 and Microsoft Office Outlook Web Access for email.
Is it possible to setup a rule to automatically move messages to a different folder, or to forward message to a different folder?
Thanks!

i haven't done it myself, i just pointed you to the article. Try it. If it does not work, you can Restore the Default settings. Save several Screenshots of the Default Settings to your Desktop to help you in case you want to Revert to the Default Settings.
Adding Screenshots - '''Creating the Screenshots''' (see this part to help you with Saving Screenshots
https://support.mozilla.com/en-US/kb/Adding%20screenshots
Check and tell if its working.

Can't access Internet via Ethernet port of 'n' Express in 'Extend' mode

I just purchased the new Airport Express (AXp) n version for the purpose of extending my Airport Extreme (AXt) n version wireless network so that I can connect my old MacBook Pro (MBP) 17" core duo, running Mac OS X 10.5.2, to the AXp via an Ethernet cable when the MBP is stationary at my desk, in order to increase the maximum speed at which I am able to access the internet, from 54 Mbps for my MBP's internal wireless g card to 130 Mbps at which the AXp runs in the following configuration.
On the AXt, I set the wireless mode to create a wireless network, checked off the option to allow this network to be extended, set the radio mode to n (b/g compatible), set the channel to 11 (works best for our house), and set the wireless security to WPA/WPA2 Personal. On the AXp, I set the wireless mode to extend a wireless network, unchecked the option to allow wireless clients (I have also tried this option checked, as well), and set the wireless security to WPA/WPA2 Personal. Both Airport bases are running firmware version 7.3.1.
When I do this everything looks fine. My network preferences indicate that I have a valid IP address, and I am able to see and screen share with other computers on the local network; however, when I try to access the internet using Safari 3.1, I get a timeout error message indicating that the server I addressed is not responding. Then when I run the diagnostics from the network preferences, it indicates that my internet connection appears to be working correctly, and all the network status lights show green.
Any ideas?

Thanks so much for all your replies. I will try to address all the points in this reply.
99, I think you are right, about Apple not supporting using the Ethernet WAN port as a LAN port when the AXp is in the "Extend" mode. However, I had read on the Apple website that it does support using the AXp WAN as a LAN in the WDS "Remote" mode, as you have verified with your older AXp, and which I had also verified with my new AXp. The only problem was, when using the AXp in the WDS "Remote" mode, the AXp ran ONLY at 54 Mbps, even when there were no additional wireless clients connected to it or to the AXt, which kind of defeated the purpose of using the AXp as an Ethernet bridge in the first place.
The only way I could get an AXp bridge to run at 130 Mbps was to use it in the "Extend" mode or the "Join" mode. In the "Join" mode, using the WAN as a LAN works fine when connecting to the Internet, but I am not able to see or screen share with any of the computers on my local network. In the "Extend" mode, I am able to see and screen share with all the computers on my local network, but I am not able to get to the Internet, even though the Network Diagnostic tool reports that my Internet connection "appears" to be working properly, and it gives me all green lights (and as near as I can tell with my limited knowledge of DNS, all that information appears correct, as well).
Bottom line, I don't think Apple has properly enabled the AXp's WAN as a LAN in the "Extend" mode, as they have in the "Join" mode and in the slower WDS "Remote" mode.

RV082 port forwarding limited to 30 entries ?

Hello,
we use RV082 as main gateway and need to open/forward around 50 ports to inside. But during setting of the rules I got an error message "The max of Port Range Forwarding is 30 entries. You can't add any more.".
In the online help is explicitely said "4. Click the Add to List button, and configure as many entries as you would like."
How can we setup more than 30 port forwarding rules ?
If it is this a sotfware bug, can this be corrected ?
Regards,
Petr Svoboda

Petr, I agree with tekliu. I use the UPnP rules with UPnP disabled for all of my port forwarding, unless a range is needed. They should not cause any more exposure than regular Forwarding rules, and if you use port translation they will reduce your exposure.
The only differences:
Forwarding allows port ranges
Forwarding has a "Port Triggering" section
UPnP allows port translation (because it's only single port at a time, not a range)
UPnP has unlimited entries

Combo unix ssh port forwarding + iChatAV + Bonjour question

I don't know which forum is best for this question, so thought I'd try here first.
I've been tossing around the idea of picking up a couple of iSights and running iChatAV. Problem is, if I understand this correctly, iChatAV uses a couple of ports for connections to third-party servers: AOL buddy server or Jabber server, a port for something called snatmap, a port for SIP, and some other stuff. Plus, it requires that you open up nearly 20 ports on your network for the AV traffic! (I get nervous just having my non-standard ports for smtp and ssh open, and my imaps port open (which is another issue -- anybody know how to change imaps port 993 to a non-standard port if running uw-imap server?) It doesn't look like iChatAV can, normally, operate by "calling up" an IP address or hostname...it always has to set up calls using AOL or Jabber...unless, perhaps, the destination iSight/iChatAV is on your own Bonjour-capable subnet.
So, I'm thinking, what if a calling party created a ssh tunnel and port-forwarded the dozens of UDP and couple of TCP ports over a ssh tunnel, as a lengthy list of port forward options like "-L 5297:localhost:5297 -L ...", (assuming that the forwarding host, to whom the caller ssh's, is the same computer that is running iChatAV, hence, the remote host specification in the "-L" option of "localhost"). Would the caller then be able to treat the connection like Bonjour networking and when he calls localhost on his end of the circuit, it "bonjours" to the called hostname's localhost and thus a peer-to-peer connection would be made?
Or perhaps a reverse port forward tunnel ("-R" options) could be set up in advance by the "to-be-called" party, and then the calling party initiates a iChatAV call as a "same-subnet-as-calling-computer-via-Bonjour" type of call?
I'm just kicking around some thoughts here; I don't know enough about the intricacies of iChatAV and Bonjour (and ssh) to really know all the "gotchas" and I'd like to get the planning done with a high degree of confidence of success before I plunk out $300 on two iSights.
If the general concensus of the group moderator and others on this forum is that this question should be posted in another forum, I apologize, and I'll move, but I thought that the ssh tunneling nature of my inquiry (and my unrelated side question about how to change 993 to a non-standard port) made this forum the obvious, and best, choice.
Thanks in advance for any thoughts on these issues!
2001 Quicksilver G4 Mac OS X (10.4.5)

No, you can't do what you describe. You have to use port forwarding on the router for any incoming connections, and each port forward rule can only map to a single server/service.
However, SSH has the ability to tunnel other connections, so it may be possible to remove one or more of the existing port forwarding rules and replace them with a SSH rule, then use SSH tunneling to get to those services. Of course, this will only work for services that only you (or other authorized users) need to access, and not public services such as web/http traffic (assuming you're running a public web site).
The only other option would be to replace your router with one that doesn't have such a strict limit on the number of port forwarding rules.

E2000 Port Forwarding Stops Working

I am using port forwarding for running a webserver. All is working fine. After a random number of hours or days, the port forwarding stops working. I can get in and look at the settings and they are correct. I can then change something on the port forwarding screen and resave it and it starts working again. Do I have a bad unit ?

Webserver might not be set to static IP. Try setting the webserver to static IP first, then make sure that static IP is enabled in the Port Forwarding screen of the router's web-based setup page. Also, protocol should be set to BOTH (TCP-UDP). You can also try having less firewall/AV restrictions on the web server (or none at all) and set MTU to 1400.

Help with port forwarding

i am running a web and mail server from my home computer. i have port 25 and port 80 set to forward traffic to my webserver. port 80 works ok, but according to the linksys log, the linksys router is blocking port 25. My isp is not blocking any ports, and i can send mail from my mail server. how can I get the linksys router to stop blocking incoming port 25? my router setup is: linksys befw11s4 port forwarding: 80 to 80 25 to 25 upnp is enabled upnp forward smtp 25 tcp to port 25 192.168.X.X dmz is enabled for the server's ip.

wiles wrote:
i am running a web and mail server from my home computer. i have port 25 and port 80 set to forward traffic to my webserver. port 80 works ok, but according to the linksys log, the linksys router is blocking port 25. My isp is not blocking any ports, and i can send mail from my mail server. how can I get the linksys router to stop blocking incoming port 25? my router setup is: linksys befw11s4 port forwarding: 80 to 80 25 to 25 upnp is enabled upnp forward smtp 25 tcp to port 25 192.168.X.X dmz is enabled for the server's ip.
First off, DISABLE the dmz!! That opens ALL ports to your pc, you dont want that.
Second, because you had the pc in the dmz tells me that the router is not blocking port 25, again, in the dmz all ports are open.
Disable upnp, it will just cause problems and you arent using it anyway.
Go to :
https://www.grc.com/x/ne.dll?bh0bkyd2
Click proceed, enter 25 in the box in the middle, then click user specified custom probe.
Does it show as stealth?

Port Forward: Conflicts with all of them.

A bit about me: I am an IT professional 20+ years so I know how to port forward
Situation:
I had a Actiontec Gen1 router. A technician came out the other day and tried to resolve an upload speed issue. As a result, he replaced the ONT and the Router to a Gen2. He got it all up and running and left. My issue started 20 minutes after he left -- when I sat down to reestablish my port forwards.
When I tryed creating my first port forward, I got a warning message about a conflict. I looked at the list and all I had were 3 preset entries:
--Localhost                               TCP Any -> 4567
--192.168.1.100:63145          Application - TCP Any -> Any
--192.168.1.100:63145          Application - TCP Any -> 1
Now, I have done port forwards a lot with my previous router so I was a bit taken back. I did a factory restore on the router and tried to create another port forward - still conflicts.
I knew something was up so I called Verizon. A tech didn't get anywhere so they put me on the phone with Actiontec. They had me try to create a port forward and got the same results. They said the router was corrupt and to have Verizon send me another.
I got the new router in today. While the tech was setting it up in the basement, I quickly tried to create a port forward on it and it worked. I was excited and waited for him to connected it to the WAN. Once he did his thing and established outside connectivity, I tried to create another port forward, and it failed. I asked him to give me back my original Gen1 router so I could use it to troubleshoot. He did with the rule that I call him when I was done.
I got Verizon back on the line and they couldn't help. They then got me on the phone with Actiontec. A couple hours later, they still had no answer. One thing we found though was that they were also not able to connect remotely. They tried 443 and 8080 - nothing worked. I also found that I was able to create UDP port forwards - they worked fine but as soon as I tried any TCP ports, the always came back with a conflict.
Actiontec said the issue was with Verizon and that I should work with them again, so I called Verizon.
I got a great tech who was really going the extra mile instead of giving me the infamous "We don't support that". He too couldn't access the router remotely and we tried just about anything under the sun. For giggles, we decided to put my old Gen1 router back in place. He wanted to reset it to factory defaults so we did. I took a screen capture of my original port forwards though first. When we restored it, it was also stating that there is a conflict when I created a new port forward.
I took a look at my screen capture of my original Gen1 router (this is the one that was originally working over the last year) and I noticed that its 192.168.1.100 entry was set to go to Application - UDP any -> 63146. After resetting it to factory default, Verizon is now setting it to the two setting I documented above.
So now I am questioning Verizons settings that they are pushing down to the router.
My next step was to disconnect it from the WAN completely, do a factory reset and see if I can create a port forward. After doing that test, I was able to create port forwards - TCP, UDP -- they all entered without a conflict. As soon as I connected the router to the WAN and Verizon pushed their settings, it broke again.
The technician did all he could. It is Sunday today and the higher tier techs do not work on Sundays so he said he will have them contact me tomorrow. I sure hope they can resolve this!
So this is the deal:
-Go into your router and try to create a port forward. Pick anyone from the list that includes a TCP port. If you get a message stating there is a conflict, you are most likely in the same boat as I. I would bet anything that Verzion cannot access your router remotely too.
-If you ARE able to create tcp port forwards, then I would highly suggest that you do not do a factory reset. When doing so, I would bet anything that you will no longer be able to create those forwards.
-if you are able to port forward fine, do me a favor and tell me what your 192.168.1.100 port forwards are that Verizon throws in there. If I were to bet, I would bet that the ones that work are set for Application - UDP any -> 63146; If they don't work, I would bet that they are set to:
--192.168.1.100:63145          Application - TCP Any -> Any
--192.168.1.100:63145          Application - TCP Any -> 1
Anyway, that is my story. I spent a whole weekend with Verizon and I am still not working. Any data from the community will be helpful. I want to know if this is a global issue or if it is only affecting me. I have had this happen with 3 routers, 1 gen1 and 2 gen2's.
Thanks for your help in advance.
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Finally - a solution. *wipes brow*
First off, I want to state that the networking group located in the Syracuse - all the other tech need to visit them for a week and learn:
- How to talk to a customer (what to say and not to say)
- How routers work, how they can be configured, and what they are capable of. Basically, learn a bit about networking.
- Listen to the customer - they may know more than you.
Anyway, thank you very much Syracuse Team!
While working with the tech (this guy was awesome and actually listened to me about the automatic port forwards that were appearing from Verizon), he decided to to use the RJ45 network WAN connection in addition the COAX. My setup was setup to only use the COAX connection - it's been that way for over a year now.
The tech turned set it up so that my data was going through the RJ45 and the TV was going through the COAX. When he did this and we reset the router to factory, the Verizon forwarded ports were no longer showing up and as a result, I was able to create ports at will without conflict.
So beware all of you who are setup to only use the COAX connection. It appears that one of my set top boxes was now throwing in the port forwards that I noted in the original post and those were screwing everything up. Go figure that, eh? I wonder who said that some 14 tech hours ago?
Anyway - if you are unable to create port forwards without a conflict error, call up Verizon and tell them the issue. If they act like they never heard this, tell them about my situation and that adding the RJ45 connection in addition the COAX is the solution. Just make sure you reset your router to factory when they are done or else those odd port forwards won't clear.
Peace out and good luck!

Extended ACL TCP port control

Hi all,
I have configured an acl to control traffic going in/out of an interface via tcp ports. However, after applying the acl to the interface, i find that eventhough ports are allowed, traffic is blocked by the acl.
I suspected that it could be the initial tcp handshake (SYN, SYNACK, ACK etc) is not being allowed (due to the implicit deny). When i included that in the acl, it worked. Is this a necessary step in an acl that controls by tcp port?
Reason is, some of the acl configured with tcp port control has not been configured to allow SYN, ACK etc but it works when some of these ACLs are applied to other interface.

Hi,
Thanks for the response. As far as the config of the ACL, it's quite straight forward with the thing i'm trying to achieve. 1.1.1.190 & 1.1.1.192 are Mail servers. The objective is to control both .190 & .192. The config is as below:
interface Vlan2
description For Mail
ip address 1.1.1.129 255.255.255.0
ip access-group 2002 in
end
C6500#sh access-li 2002
Extended IP access list 2002
10 permit icmp any any (272 matches)
20 permit tcp host 1.1.1.0 any syn (10467 matches)
30 permit tcp host 1.1.1.0 any ack (781 matches)
40 permit tcp host 1.1.1.190 eq smtp any
50 permit tcp host 1.1.1.190 eq pop3 any
60 permit tcp host 1.1.1.192 eq smtp any
70 permit tcp host 1.1.1.192 eq pop3 any (4 matches)
80 permit ip host 1.1.1.183 2.2.0.0 0.0.255.255 (19 matches)
When I first created this ACL, without the SYN & ACK configured, users failed to connect to the servers. I personally believe users could connect, but it's the return packets from the servers that might have gotten blocked by the ACL. However, after I added in the SYN & ACK, all went well. I could see counters incrementing for the SYN & ACK as well.
Whereas, some other applications that use some custom ports, ie. 10000, 10001, didn't seem to need the explicit configuration of the SYN/ACKs & the ACL worked well.

BT Infinity - Port Forwarding and Vodafone Sure Si...

I have been lucky enough to upgrade from BT Total Broadband (Home Hub 1 and then 2) to BT Infinity (Home Hub 2 with Openreach box). I can remember having major problems with port forwarding with my previous installation, even though the step by step instructions given by BT regarding application sharing was accurate. I resorted to using TELNET and then certain key commands that ensured it did work. A forum simular to this one saved the day. Now I have the new BT Infinity box of tricks and I appear to have the same problem and now I cannot use TELNET to tear down these restrictions. I have switched off the Firewall within the menu system but realise that this is still operational in some kind of way. All incoming data is still being blocked. I need to make sure the following ports are open to the World so that my Vodafone Sure Signal works: TCP: 8 TCP: 50 TCP: 123 UDP: 500 UDP: 4500 I have also enable the VPN clamping as suggested. Can anyone help me? Vodafone can only advise me on these port numbers the rest is ISP driven. Do I need to speak to an engineer? Do I need to TELNET the Home Hub some how? Thank you in advance.
Solved!
Go to Solution.

There is a nationwide problem with Sure Signal connecting through BTinternet which has been ongoing since the 27th. It doesn't seem to be a problem through other internet providers nor does it seem to be specific to any particular versions of Sure Signal or BT Home Hub.
There's no point trying to talk to BT customer services about it - the idiot I was speaking to yesterday insisted that I needed to change the Wi-Fi channel on my Home Hub in order to get my (wired) Sure Signal working again.
Vodafone's customer services are not quite as sh*t as BT's but not much more help. They do, at least, acknowledge that there is a problem and that it is being worked on by engineers (not sure if it is Voda or BT engineers?) but can only say that the "hope it is fixed in the next 24 hours."
If you are thinking of speaking to BT's "customer support specialists" about this, I suggest you poke yourself in the eye instead; it's as likely to fix the problem, will take less time and probably be less painful.

Single Port Forwarding on a WRV210 router

I was wondering if anyone can tell me how to forward a single port to a different port to a specific computer for the WRV210 router?
I would like to forward port 10100 to port 25 to my mail server. There are times when our people are at a hotel and they block port 25 and I have done this in the past on a BEFSR11 and BEFSR41 router. There does not seem to be a Single Port Forwarding setup page and the Port Forwarding setup page only allows you to forward a range to a specific computer, it does not give you a different port you can assign an incoming port to.
I have the most current firmware revision, 2.0.0.11, and Hardware Version WRTR-221G_V01.
I look forward to any replies.
Fred.

Will it ever be able to support this? seems like a pretty reasonable request since this device is billed as a small business device.
so far i have spent over 1000 dollars on cisco gear first 2 rvs4000 to do BO vpn
then 2 wet200 thinking i would be able to create a bridge to my garage while wireless users could surf. little did i know that the wet200 could not be an AP.
i then went looking for a cisco small business AP only. could find one at any local retailer. so i bought the wrv210 and removed my rvs4000 seems i just downgraded myself. i should have just gone out and bought a $40 dlink AP.
very disappointed. hopefully you can share my experience with someone who can explain why a small business device wouldnt want to use port redirection.
If you see a bunch of used cisco small business gear online thats me,

UDP and TCP ports

Hi:
I have a question. As we know, scanning TCP ports is a lot eaiser than UDP ports because active UDP ports don't respond and there are other reasons as well.
try{
Socket soc= new Scoket(address, portnumber);
catch(Throwable e){ System.out.println(e)}
look at the code above, it can only tell you active TCP ports for the Throwable e tells you nothing about UDP ports. An active UDP port doesn' respond to the connection call "soc". Therefore it will throw an exception(connection refused) after trying to connect an active UDP port. This exception is just like those of closed TCP ports.
What i am saying is that active UDP ports will be treated the same as closed TCP ports. They are hidden in closed TCP ports. How do i sift them out? Any solutions?

I am basically trying to determine how many UDP and TCP ports on a machine are open. Open TCP ports are easy to see. But UDP ports are tricky. Can you please tell me more in detail using a datagram socket?

How to port forward?

I can't figure out how to port forward my Minecraft server.
Help?

The steps are listed here.. for aebs but same difference.
https://discussions.apple.com/message/16689298#16689298
I would use the 5.6 utility as the 6.0 or 6.1 in Lion is a dog.
http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1482
The TC has to be the main router for this to be relevant. If you have another router or double NAT.. you will need to port forward on the main router and eliminate double NAT.

Can I setup ssh via TCP port forwarding?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for