Port Forwarding Rules

I had to do a factory reset on my MI424WR router while trying to get a security DVR accessable from the outside. I noticed that I have far fewer port forwarding rules now than before the reset.  Does anyone have a list of rules I "should" have. Or maybe a config file I can load? 
The issues now are that I lose connectivity with the net after the router runs for a couple hours.  I also lose the ability to log into the router.  Resetting the router clears it for a while, but then it dies again. 

The rules that should be in the router should be applied by Verizon or added by the router automatically as time goes on. For your case, just re-create your rules and see if anything breaks.
For the router deal, consider disabling services like UPnP, the IGMP gateway, and the Firewall so the router runs in simplest form. Alternatively,  see if you can narrow down the disconnects down to a specific device or with bad Coax if you have a coax connection back to the ONT. Failing that, consider asking for a new router from Verizon. 
========
The first to bring me 1Gbps Fiber for $30/m wins!

Similar Messages

  • Two web servers cant use same port forwarding rule???

    I have two web servers, each configured to respond to http reqests on port 80.  I use NoIP service to map a domain name to my router. I create a port forwarding assignment for Server A by selecting the WebServer rule in the port forwarding rule table.  All is fine.  For Server B, I select the same Webserver rule and the router says there is a conflict.
    I don't understand why.  I think the router has enough information to route a http request for Server B by knowing its MAC address, which is different than Server A MAC address.
    What am I missing here???
    I was able to do this on my previous router with DD-WRT.....
    So it would appear the way to resolve this is to assign a different port address to Server B???
    grrrrrrrrrr I hate this router

    You shouldn't have been able to do that on any router.  You have to change the listening port of server 2, to 8080 or something like that, or make one a secure server and run it over 443
    That is a known issue with port forwarding
    Problem #8:
    Same Port in Multiple Rules
    There are some routers such as Linksys, D-Link and many others that do not do any checks if a port is already in another port forwarding rule. A port can only be forwarded to one Computer/IP at a time. So when there are multiples of the same port number the port forwarding rule will not work.
    Here is an example.
    As you can see port 2350 is in 2 rules. The 1st one points to a different IP than that of the 2nd rule. So the router will honor the 1st rule and the 2nd port forwarding rule to port 2350 fails.
    By removing the 1st rule the 2nd one will now work.

  • Publish the port forwarding rules and req. for customers to use the FiOS TV features they pay for!

    Please read this thread and vote.
    http://forums.verizon.com/t5/Share-Your-Ideas-with​-Verizon/Publish-the-port-forwarding-rules-and-req​...

    Here they are, but - yes it would be great if Verizon published these, or at the very least linked to Actiontec's Website, where they publish the rules as well.   or at least sticky some of these instructions here in the forums.   
    Instructional Video's and step by step detailed instructions for port forwarding
    How to enable BASIC Port Forwarding on the MI424WR Verizon FiOS Router (actiontec.com)
    How to Configure Advanced Port Forwarding on the MI424WR Verizon FiOS Router  (actiontec.com)
    PCWintech's guide to portforwarding for the actiontec MI424WR (Verizon Firmware)
    PCWintech's guide to portforwarding for the Westell 327w DSL Modem
    PortForward.com
    I put my vote in. 
    EDIT:  I Didn't realize you were asking for the port forwarding rules to the features, I should have read better.     But yes I agree with that too.   

  • RV180W loses port forwarding rules when switching WAN connections

    We have a backup WAN connection in our office, but we switch this connection manually on our RV180W when the primary goes down. Our normal connection is ADSL with PPPoE, and the backup is Cable with DHCP.
    However, we also have some port forwarding rules for our VoIP PBX (UDP port 5060) as well as SSH, and these rules seem to stop working completely when we switch our WAN connection to our cable connection. We can still surf the web from our workstations, but our incoming phone calls and SSH connections all cease to work completely. The problem does not persist after we've switched back to our normal ADSL connection.
    This behaviour is completely bizarre and suggests that there's some kind of bug in the Cisco RV180W.

    helm,
    I'm sorry, I wasn't clear which IP address renewal I am speaking about.
    I believe that the problem is caused when the router renews the WHS's local IP address (192.168...). My WAN IP address remains unchanged througout the tests I performed and the problems I experienced.
    The very act of changing the local clients' lease time in the router's configuration causes the forwarding to be lost immediately. (I am gusessing that when the lease time is changed, the router immediately renews the lease and begins a new countdown.)
    (In fact, I might go as far as to say it is a bug in the firmware, but I haven't done enough testing to nail it down.)

  • Port Forwarding Rule Added Via UPnP

    14:24:13, 27 May.
    (2110048.260000) Port forwarding rule added via UPnP. protocol: UDP, external ports: any->57902, internal ports: 57902, internal client: 192.168.1.65
    14:23:34, 27 May.
    (2110008.940000) Port forwarding rule added via UPnP. protocol: UDP, external ports: any->57902, internal ports: 57902, internal client: 192.168.1.65
    14:22:53, 27 May.
    (2109967.800000) Port forwarding rule added via UPnP. protocol: UDP, external ports: any->57902, internal ports: 57902, internal client: 192.168.1.65
    14:22:10, 27 May.
    (2109925.160000) Port forwarding rule added via UPnP. protocol: UDP, external ports: any->57902, internal ports: 57902, internal client: 192.168.1.65
    14:21:37, 27 May.
    (2109892.130000) Port forwarding rule added via UPnP. protocol: UDP, external ports: any->57902, internal ports: 57902, internal client: 192.168.1.65
    14:21:06, 27 May.
    (2109861.170000) Port forwarding rule added via UPnP. protocol: UDP, external ports: any->57902, internal ports: 57902, internal client: 192.168.1.65
    14:20:26, 27 May.
    (2109820.740000) Port forwarding rule added via UPnP. protocol: UDP, external ports: any->57902, internal ports: 57902, internal client: 192.168.1.65
     Hi guys, would anyone be able to tell me what the above messages in my HH3's log mean?  My connection has been fine but I would like to know why this is happening every few seconds. 
    At first I thought it was because of a certain program I was using but it happens even when this program isn't running so I just don't know!!  Any help is appreciated.
    EDIT:  So I'm guessing it's something to do with having UPnP turned on.  The reason I'm asking is because I've seen other people's logs and they aren't filled with this message.

    Thanks, TommyBobbins.
    I will turn off UPnP and see what happens.
    I checked the logs again my computer has a lease of 192.168.1.64 - this IP address is also showing the same error in the logs. I suspect the other IP address, ending in 65 is my Dad's computer. He uses Windows and I use Mac.
    I'll keep you posted.
    EDIT:  Just turned off UPnP and that was OK.  I checked a program called uTorrent and it says the incoming TCP port (54488) is working.....I find this strange as I have portforwarding turned off... :s
    Any ideas?
    EDIT AGAIN:
    Just wanted to add this in:
    18:54:38, 27 May.
    (2126273.250000) Port forwarding rule added via UPnP. protocol: UDP, external ports: any->52503, internal ports: 52503, internal client: 192.168.1.65
    18:53:53, 27 May.
    (2126228.130000) Port forwarding rule added via UPnP. protocol: UDP, external ports: any->52503, internal ports: 52503, internal client: 192.168.1.65
    18:53:20, 27 May.
    (2126194.690000) Port forwarding rule added via UPnP. protocol: UDP, external ports: any->52503, internal ports: 52503, internal client: 192.168.1.65
    20:34:34, 27 May.
    (2132268.320000) Port forwarding rule added via UPnP. protocol: UDP, external ports: any->54488, internal ports: 54488, internal client: 192.168.1.64
    20:34:31, 27 May.
    (2132266.240000) Port forwarding rule deleted via UPnP. protocol: UDP, external ports: any->54488, internal ports: 54488, internal client: 192.168.1.64
    20:34:29, 27 May.
    (2132264.190000) Port forwarding rule added via UPnP. protocol: TCP, external ports: any->54488, internal ports: 54488, internal client: 192.168.1.64
    20:34:27, 27 May.
    (2132262.050000) Port forwarding rule deleted via UPnP. protocol: TCP, external ports: any->54488, internal ports: 54488, internal client: 192.168.1.64
    As you can see it happens on different ports and UDP and TCP ports....
    Hasn't happened in the 20mins or so I've had UPnP turned off.  Still, I am curious as to what causes this.

  • Lync Edge and Proxy server public DNS records port forwarding rules

    Hi All
    I have question in regards to port forwarding rules for port 443 of simple url.
    I have 4 public ip addresses.
    1 edge server (4 nics , 3 running with different ip for sip, meet and dialin in DMZ network, 1 connected to internal local network).
    1 proxy server (2 nics, 1 running with an ip which is in DMZ same as edge, and 1 connected to internal local network)
    1 front end (lync 2013 standard installed.) connected to internal local network
    1 office web apps . connected to internal local network
    The question is that I am using 3 public ip addresses respectively on public DNS records for sip, meet and dialin(av) and using port 443 which has been set on edge server. So , I can use 3 DMZ network ip address on edge for sip, meet
    and dialin (av) port forwarding from 3 public ip addresses as per in Microsoft document.
    However, I also have a reverse proxy .Hence, my understanding is all public DNS records except SIP and port 443 should be pointed and port forwarded to reverse proxy ip address which is in DMZ network as it would redirect 443 and 80 to 4443 and 8080 to front
    end.
    Now the question has been clear, if simple URLs public DNS record and port forwarding rules for port 443 should be pointed to reverse proxy server, why they need to be set on each ip address and port number in Front end server topology to edge server?
    If anyone knows, please give a help how to set it correct and what is supposed to be a correct configuration for a topology lync 2013

    Hi George
    Thanks for your reply. Attached is my topology which could make my it bit clear. You may see the public dns host record from the image. I set sip, meet, dialin , and owa 4 host records. The first 3 records are pointed to lync edge by doing a NAT with port
    443 which is the same as per you said. However my understanding is they should be pointed to reverse proxy instead as for instance, I need meet.xxx.com with port 443 to be redirected to port 4443 through reverse proxy server to the front end. So when the external
    customers who do not have lync client installed to their machine then we can shoot a lync meeting and send to them via outlook and they just need to click on join lync meeting link in the email to join in such a meeting based on IE. (Is my understanding correct?)
    If lync web meeting works like so , then the question is why I need to set three SAME addresses in front end topology builder for edge and make them point to edge server instead?　
    １. Access Edge service (SIP.XXX.COM) ---> I understand that it is used for external login lync front end.
    2. Webconf edge server(Can I set to meet.xxx.com which is the same as simple URL that points to reverse proxy?) ----> If I can set this address to be the same as simple url address that points to reverse proxy, why should it need to be NATed to edge
    instead? TO BE HONEST, if I HAVE tested, if I set this url as sip.xxx.com which means to use a single FQDN and ip address with port 444 and points simple url meet.xxx.com to reverse proxy, it will still work to join lync meeting sent by
    outlook.I DO NOT REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT this URL used for at this stage.
    3. AV edge --- same as webconf
    Regards
    Wen Fei Cao

  • Maximum port forwarding rules in RVS4000 ?

    Hello,
    I'm wondering if there is a maximum number of port forwarding rule in the RVS4000.
    I can't find this information in the specs.
    Thanks in advance.

    great. so the better question is WHY is there a maxium? i need to set up many rules in my SMALL BUSINESS environment. this stupid sh!t is costing me A LOT OF MONEY

  • ASA 5505 how to create a port forwarding rule

    ASA 5505 IOS ver 9.2.3
    I need to create a firewall rule that will allow internal services to be accessed externally, but using port forwarding. For example I'd like to enable access to our NAS via ftp external on port 1545 and then have the ASA forward the request to the NAS internally on port 21.
    I tried these commands but they didn't work:
    object network NAS
    host 192.168.2.8
    nat (inside,outside) static interface service tcp 21 1545
    access-list NASFTP-in permit tcp any object NAS eq 1545
    conf t
    int vlan 2
    access-group NASFTP-in permit tcp any object NAS eq 1545
    I really appreciate the help everyone.

    try this, it worked for me, here is an example of adding a webserver with a ip of 10.10.50.60  and naming it with a object named www-server and forwarding port 80 , the way it works is you need to do three things, u need to "nat it" "foward it" and allow it in "acl"
    object network obj-10.10.50.60-1
    host 10.10.50.60
    nat (inside,outside) static interface service tcp 80 80
    object network INSIDE
    nat (inside,outside) dynamic interface
    object network WWW-SERVER
    nat (inside,outside) static interface service tcp 80 80
    access-list Outside_access_in extended permit tcp any object WWW-SERVER eq 80
    access-group Outside_access_in in interface Outside

  • Weird conflicts adding port forwarding rules

    I've just joined BT and I'm trying to add the portforwarding rules I need and had on my previous router (Thompson 585v7).
    I created a ruleset named "eMule (38297)" forwarding TCP 38297 and UDP 16318.
    When I go to assign it, I select the rule then my PC and it changes the name to "BT HomeSafe CameraeMule (38297)" and when I click Add it just shows it as "BT HomeSafe Camera". So I checked this rule by going to Add User Defined and selecting Copy an existing rule and then BT HomeSafe Camera and it shows that this is forwarding TCP/UDP 1024 which doesn't conflict with my eMule rule whatsoever.
    I have the same problem with a rule to forward TCP/UDP 3071-3072, which the Hub mixes up with PalTalk, which forwards 2090-2091 and 2095 and a rule to forward TCP/UDP 52616 which it mixes up with Rainbow Six, which forwards TCP/UDP 2346. In fact, pretty much any ruleset I've created has this problem when I go to assign it.
    So basically it's a big old mess and I wonder if anyone knows how to fix it
    Solved!
    Go to Solution.

    This page may help to sort out your problem.
    Port forwarding problems
    You need to give your devices static IP addresses, and port forward to the IP address, not the device name.
    You should be able to copy an existing assignment, but remember to rename the new application first.
    There are some useful help pages here, for BT Broadband customers only, on my personal website.
    BT Broadband customers - help with broadband, WiFi, networking, e-mail and phones.

  • Question about editing port forwarding rules on the Actiontec

    I notice that it seems to combine all rules entered for a specific internal IP address into a group.  unfortunately, I don't see an option to edit the inidividual rules, or delete them.  It appears to only allow the deletion of the entire rule group?  So do I need to write down each of the rules pointing to a single IP address and then delete the group and enter the rules I want to keep back into the router?  Thanks.

    Hello,
    Do you see an option to edit under advanced filtering?  I would like to check into this for you I sent you a DM to start.
    Shamika_Vz
    Verizon Support
    Notice: Content posted by Verizon employees is meant to be informational and does not supersede or change the Verizon Forums User Guidelines or Terms or Service, or your Customer Agreement Terms and Conditions or Plan.

  • Port forwarding for clientless SSL VPN access

    Hello,
    I am currently trying to set up clientless SSL VPN access for some remote sites that our company does business with. Since their machines are not owned by my company, we don't want to install/support a VPN client. Therefore, SSL is a great option.
    However, I'm running into an issue. I'm trying to set up port forwarding for a few remote servers. These remote servers are different and have distinct IP addresses. They are attempting to connect with two different servers here.
    But my issue is that both servers are trying to use the same TCP port. The ASDM is not letting me use two different port forwarding rules for the same TCP port. The rules can exist side-by-side, but they cannot be used at the same time.
    Why? It's not trying to access the same TCP port on a server when it's already in use. Is there anyway I can get around this?
    If this doesn't make sense, please let me know and I'll do my best to explain it better.

    Hi Caleb,
    if you mean clientless webvpn port-forwarding lists, then you should be able to get your requirments. even the same port of the same server can be mapped to different ports bound to the loopback IP.
    CLI:
    ciscoasa(config) webvpn
    ciscoasa(config-webvpn)# port-forward PF 2323 192.168.1.100 23
    ciscoasa(config-webvpn)# port-forward PF 2300 192.168.1.200 23
    then you apply the port-forwarder list under a group-policy
    Hope this helps
    Mashal
    Mashal Alshboul

  • Port Forwarding for L2TP/IPSec VPN Behind Verizon Actiontec MI424WR-GEN2 Rev. E v20.21.0.2

    I've got a NAS setup with various services running on custom ports to help minimize exposure (especially to script kiddies). I've tested everything both internally and externally to confirm they all work, and even had someone at a remote location confirm accessibility as well.  Port forward configurations performed on the Actiontec are working well. 
    I installed an L2TP/IPSec VPN server, tested internally and it connected successfully.  So for all intents & purposes, this validates that the VPN server is correctly configured to accept inbound connections and functioning correctly.
    I logged into the Verizon Actiontec MI424WR router, setup port forwarding for UDP ports 500, 1701 & 4500.
    Note: I added the AH & ESP protocols based on what I saw on the built-in L2TP/IPSec rules
    With the port forwarding in place, I tested VPN externally but it didn't connect.
    I've done the following so far to no avail:
    Double & triple checked the port forwards, deleted & recreated the rules a few times to be sure
    There are no other pre-existing L2RP/IPSec port forward rules or otherwise conflicting port forward rules (e.g.: another rule for ports 500, 1701 or 4500)
    There was an L2TP port triggering rule enabled, that I toggled on and off with no change
    Verified the firewall on VPN server had an exclusion for L2TP, or that the firewall is off. (Firewall is off to reduce a layer of complexity, but it worked internally to begin with so I doubt that's the issue.)
    Since it works internally, and there are no entries in the logs on the device indicating inbound connections, I'm convinced its an issue with the Verizon Actiontec router.  But unfortunately, I'm not sure what else to try or where else to look to troubleshoot this.  For instance, is there a log on the router that I can view in real time (e.g.: tail) that would show me whether or not the inbound connection attempt is reaching the device, and whether or not the device allowed or blocked it?
    My router details:
    Verizon Actiontec
    MI424WR-GEN2
    Revision E
    Firmware 20.21.0.2
    Verizon Actiontec built-in L2TP/IPSec rule templates.  They're not currently in use, but are baked into the firmware for easy configuration/selection from a drop down menu.
    Solved!
    Go to Solution.

    normally a vpn on that router, will have a GRE tunneling protocol as well.
    two ways to build the PF rules,
    Manually
    Preconfigured
    I know the preconfigured VPN rules will do the GRE protocol as well, but if you do it by hand you can't get it.

  • Remote TC access via port forwarding

    I have been trying to setup my network for remote TC access via port forwarding. Here's my setup:
    Verizon FiOS router (main router, dhcp & nat) -> connected to TC set in bridge mode with a static IP
    I can remotely access the TC using Back to my Mac with no problems, and of course locally on the home network via Wifi.
    Since the TC has to connect in bridge mode, port forwarding is done on the FiOS router.
    If I set a port forwarding rule in the FiOS router TCP,UDP (any) to port 548, it works. However I want to use a specific connection port
    so others can't connect unless they know the forwarded port. BTW, I have remote disk sharing set with Use Device Password.
    So here's what works:
    FiOS Router (TCP any -> 548, UDP any ->548)
    What doesn't work:
    FiOS router (TCP 8990 -> 548, UDP 8990 -> 548).
    Is there any additional setting required for specific port forwarding to work?

    You're my hero!
    I also have my TC in Bridge Mode to my Verizon FIOS Router.  I used to be able to access my TC remotely, but since I upgraded my router (MI424WR GigE), I had forgotten some port forwarding rules I must have established in my old router.  Once I re-created these two port forwarding rules (just like yours), I can remote access my TC (with TC password) again.
    In addition, I have a static host name aliased to my dynamic IP address through dyndns.org (I have the free version, which I don't think is available anymore, but there are other free providers out there) for easier remote access.
    Regarding, Secure Share Disks: with TC password vs a disk password. Is one more secure than the other?
    Thanks!

  • Help with port forwarding to application

    Help needed to Port Forward on to my PS3. 
    I need to forward the following ports: 
    UDP: 3074; 3659; 6000
    TCP: 80; 443; 3659; 10000 - 10099; 42127
    Have previously given the PS3 a static IP, set the port forwarding rules and then forwarded to the IP address, but it appears the ports have not opened as expected.
    Help Keith

    I can only see one image which just shows the application mapping, but no indication as to whether you had clicked the "apply" button.
    Why are you forwarding ports 80 and 443, are you running a webserver on the PS3, as those ports are used for web serving.
    As a matter of interest, your port 80 is showing as open at the moment, so is the PS3 turned on, or is port 80 mapped to something else instead?
    What I would like you to do is to start from the beginning, with just the single TCP port number 3659 assigned to the PS3.
    It will mean removing the other assignments, but it will make things a bit easier.
    If you could do that please, and then we can do some tests.
    There are some useful help pages here, for BT Broadband customers only, on my personal website.
    BT Broadband customers - help with broadband, WiFi, networking, e-mail and phones.

  • How to do port forwarding from wla2-g54l Buffalo bridge to mac mini

    Hi,
    I am trying to get Azurus to remove the "firewall block" message and I think I have narrowed it down to port forwarding.
    I have set up port forwarding from my X modem to the Airport Xpress base station. I have then set up the port forwarding from the base station to the buffalo.
    The problem I have had is setting up the wla2-g54l to forward the same port to the mac mini....
    any Ideas? Not much luck on the Buffalo website.. and I have RTFM. Many times!
    Cheers
    Mac Mini G4 1.2Gz   Mac OS X (10.4.8)  

    It sounds like your set-up is in a horrible mess with 3 levels of NAT going on.
    What you should really have is the X-Modem configured in it's default mode "Modem Mode" where there will be no need to do any port forwarding as the modem is acting as a pure modem without having any influence over ports.
    Then the Airport express should be configured to "Distribute IP addresses" so that the Airport is acting as a router. I presume that you use the Buffalo unit as a repeater for the AIrport so you should set-up WDS so that both are on the same network. Then your computers will all be using IP addresses in the 10.0.1.x range as issued by the Airport. You can then configure the Airport to directly forward ports to the IP address of your computer. Therefore only one instance of NAT and only one set of port forwarding rules.

Maybe you are looking for