RV016 port forwarding by WAN port?

Hi,
I am replacing an ancient SOHO 90 series router with our new RV016, I was told this thing would do everything we needed which I didn't doubt, however, I am wondering if I made the wrong choice now. We have 5 IP's on one line coming into the current router, that isn't an issue, if needed I can make 5 seperate drops with each IP, but, now we have several servers hosting services on the same ports. For example 5.2 host a web server which is called to by the .250 address, 5.3 has one as well from .251, we have one on each of the 5, there are other servers too though on each of the 5 using the same ports. When I go to port forwarding the only option is to forward the single port to a single server, can I not forward ports from each WAN connection to a different server? Any help would be appreciated.
Here is a short sample from the old soho of what I want to do
ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.5.5 443 *.*.*.250 443 extendable
ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.5.6 443 *.*.*.251 443 extendable
ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.5.5 80 *.*.*.250 80 extendable
ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.5.6 80 *.*.*.251 80 extendable
ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.5.22 80 *.252 80 extendable
ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.5.22 443 *.252 443 extendable
ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.5.96 6437 *.251 6437 extendable
ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.5.96 6438 *.251 6438 extendable
ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.5.96 6439 *.251 6439 extendable
ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.5.93 7437 *.251 7437 extendable
ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.5.93 7438 *.251 7438 extendable
ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.5.93 7439 *.251 7439 extendable
ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.5.101 8437 *.251 8437 extendable
ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.5.101 8438 *.251 8438 extendable
ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.5.101 8439 *.251 8439 extendable
ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.5.90 9437 *.251 9437 extendable
ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.5.90 9438 *.251 9438 extendable

The multi-WAN feature of RV016 is designed for redundancy and load balancing, so basic port forwarding is not tied to a specific WAN port. If a LAN server is exposed to the internet by the 1-to-1 NAT feature of RV016, the server can be accessed by a specified public IP address.

Similar Messages

RV016 - Port Forwarding

I have an RV016 router with 2 Fibre WAN connections on it. I have two internal servers with resources I need available externally.
I would like WAN1 to forward port 443 to server 1 and WAN2 to forward port 443 to server 2.
It does not appear this is possible as you do not have the option to select which WAN port you want the port forwarding for and can only forward ALL traffic on 443 to one internal server.
Does anyone know if this is possible or not?
Thanks

Hi Wbtadmin1,
You can use Port access translation which you can translate the port for example if you have two server listen in the same port such 443 , with port access translation you can choose an external port and internal port.
configuration :
Please follow this steps:
1. Please remove the rule of the port forwarding
2. Go to Setup under UPnP , service management and you will see external port and internal port so please configure external port to xxx and internal to 443 and click add, please do not enable UPnP
3. on the same page please choose the service you created and put the internal IP of the server A
4. for the second rule is the same just change teh external port to yyy and in internal 443 and put the second server B as internal IP
if you want to access to server A : publicIP:external port xxx
if you want to access to server B : publicIP:external port yyy
Now we want to restrict Client to access to server A from WAN 2 and allow only from WAN1
Under Firewall -- Access Rules
- Allow service (you can create custom service for external port xxx) from WAN1 to Server A
- seconds Access rules Deny Service (custom service xxx) from WAN 2 to Server A
- The same for server B
N.B : for Protocol Binding is working from LAN to WAN it means if you want to force Server A to communicate outside through WAN 1 or WAN 2
Please rate the post or mark it as answered to help other Cisco customers
Thanks
Mehdi

NAT port-forwarding and WAN side IP addresses

I have my Airport Extreme setup to forward port 21 to an FTP server on the LAN side of my network. The AE is connected via DSL to my ISP.
When a client from the WAN side connects to my server, the server's LOGS don't list the IP of the client, rather it says the client connected from my assigned WAN IP. For example (fake ip's):
Client ----> AE ----> FTP-SERVER
130.129.12.3 76.99.89.3 10.0.1.2
Log states client connected
from IP: 76.99.89.3
My previous Linksys router, with the same DSL modem and ISP, would report the client as connecting from 130.129.12.3.
Am I missing something in how I am configureing my AE? Or, is this how the AE manages port-forwarding and there's nothing I can do about it?
I used to use firewall rules to control access to the FTP server, i.e. rules set on the server. This can't be done anymore with the AE operating as it does.

Seems to me that the NAT translation in the Airport 802.11n is such that it does not use the incoming IP of clients connecting from the WAN side to a computer on the LAN side. The ingoing and outgoing packets reach their respective destinations, it is just that the AE uses some kind of non-standard routing (at least not that I am used to working with).
This is bad because it prevents the use of some forms of access controls on BSD and Linux servers on the LAN side, TCP Wrappers and iptables for example. This can create obvious security problems when WAN ports are set to forward to such a LAN client. We are already getting hit with robot-like script attacks on our server, this was a problem with our Linksys router, but with the above mentioned tools and scripts we were able to block abusive clients.
Perhaps an Apple can work on resolving this issue in a future firmware release, at least make it an option... Anyone from Apple out there?
jmj

Rv320 - port forwarding from a specific WAN IP

Hi, i just received and configuring the rv320 router. I can successfully set the port forwarding from WAN to specific LAN IP address. I would like to know is it possible for this device to set the port forwarding from a specific WAN IP address? Thank you for the help.

I have the same problem, and have already tried creating a Access Rule without success. I need to forward Remote Desktop Port 3389 from a specific public IP address to a internal server. I do this with other lower-level Cisco Small Business routers all the time, but cannot get this to work with the RV320. Here's what I've tried:
1) Create new Access Rule
2) Create new Service called TS for TCP port 3389-3389
3) Set new Access Rule to Allow
4) Set Source Interface to Any (I've also tried WAN1, etc.)
5) Set Source IP to the only single public IP that will be allowed
6) Set Destination IP to the single internal IP address
7) Set Scheduling to Always
When I use any standard RDP app from the outside, the router blocks 3389 access.
What am I missing? Can anyone help resolve this, or do I need to call in to Cisco Support?

RVS4000 WAN PORT set to 1000Mbit

Is there a way to set the WAN Port to 1000Mbit? My Cablemodem supports up to 1000Mbit on the interface but the RVS4000 only runs at 100Mbit WAN Port speed.
It would be great to have the same options as for the LAN ports to change sensing also on the WAN port.
Thanks.

Hi Gonzalo,
The RVS4000 router can only allow one WAN IP address at a time. The RV series routers (RV042, RV082, and RV016) can allow multiple WAN IP addresses for load balancing or failovers.

RVS4000 secondary public IP on wan port - how to

Hello
I have a RVS4000 and 2 segments of public IP addresses and I need to configure a secondary public IP as secondary for WAN port.
Is it possible ?
Thank you
Gonzalo

Hi Gonzalo,
The RVS4000 router can only allow one WAN IP address at a time. The RV series routers (RV042, RV082, and RV016) can allow multiple WAN IP addresses for load balancing or failovers.

WAG320N port forwarding to wireless client/bridge client

Hi,
My network looks like the above diagram:
1. Wireless bridge connections.
ADSL Line ==> WAG320N (192.168.1.1) == bridge client mode ==> TP-Link WR941ND (192.168.1.4) ==> Client (192.168.1.11)
2. Lan connections.
ADSL Line ==> WAG320N (192.168.1.1) == cable connection ==> Client (192.168.1.100)
3. Wireless AP conenctions.
ADSL Line ==> WAG320N (192.168.1.1) == wireless connection ==> Client (192.168.1.106)
Port forwarding from WAN to LAN (scenario 2) clients works great, but I have problem with wireless clients (scenario 1 and 3). Accessing the wireless destination from LAN is possible. Also pings from WAG320N to the wireless destination looks OK.
PING 192.168.1.11 (192.168.1.11) 60 bytes of data.
60 bytes from 192.168.1.11: icmp_seq=1 ttl=63 time=1.69 ms
60 bytes from 192.168.1.11: icmp_seq=2 ttl=63 time=1.62 ms
60 bytes from 192.168.1.11: icmp_seq=3 ttl=63 time=2.23 ms
60 bytes from 192.168.1.11: icmp_seq=4 ttl=63 time=1.60 ms
60 bytes from 192.168.1.11: icmp_seq=5 ttl=63 time=2.12 ms
60 bytes from 192.168.1.11: icmp_seq=6 ttl=63 time=3.78 ms
60 bytes from 192.168.1.11: icmp_seq=7 ttl=63 time=1.61 ms
60 bytes from 192.168.1.11: icmp_seq=8 ttl=63 time=1.56 ms
60 bytes from 192.168.1.11: icmp_seq=9 ttl=63 time=2.08 ms
60 bytes from 192.168.1.11: icmp_seq=10 ttl=63 time=3.37 ms
--- 192.168.1.11 ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9002ms
rount-trip min/avg/max/mdev = 1.569/2.172/3.788/0.748
Forwarding external port 9090 to wireless client (192.168.1.11:80) is not working. I am thinking of resetting to default settings. What do you think?

nicebilal_007 wrote:
Hope ! You are fine.I am using LINKSYS WAG320N since 10 days.I am facing no. of issues.If wifi is on & i connect "LAN PORT OF MY PC" to LINKSYS WAG320N or with ADSL Modem.My LAN doesn't work.
When i am using wifi,it frequently disconnects or doesn't work.
There is no fault from my ISP Provider.
Anyone can address my issues...Thanks a lot....
From:Bilal Ali-Pakistan
[email protected]
0092-344-7127679
Reset the WAG320N then check if you are getting a valid ip address to know if it is still assigning an ip address to the network. To reset, press and hold the reset button for 30 seconds while the power on. After that, release the button and power off the WAG. Leave it off for 30 seconds then power it back on. Wait for the power light to stop blinking then check if you have a valid ip address with the computer. You may click the link below on how to check the ip address of the computer:
Title: Checking your computer’s IP address
Article ID: 3996
http://kb.linksys.com/Linksys/ukp.aspx?vw=1&docid=d02ed3aa3e704caea42f5c007b8c6472_3996.xml&pid=80&r...

SA 540 Can't get port forwarding to work.

Now that the DMZ port doesn't seem to work, I have placed our Web and CRM server on a VLAN. I have created a firewall forwarding rule -> WAN to LAN HTTP allow always and pointed it to the internal IP address.
When I type in our domain name in the browser I only get the Cisco remote management page, no forwarding to the web server.
What am I doing wrong?
I have tried to disable the remote management, but that still doesn't change anything. (btw, how do I change which port the RMON uses, it's grayed out in the setup page)
SA 540 firmware 1.0.39

No it does not work from outside my devise, I just get to the RMON page, no forwarding to my Web server at all. I've taken all FW rules away and just have the WAN to LAN allow HTTP "ip address of server" but still nothing.
I got confirmation that the DMZ/Optional port does not work, I can't SSL from our Apple computers to our Network, and now it seems like we can't get our Web or e-mail servers working either if there is not port forwarding. On top of this, it now also seems like the SA 540 is blocking EDNS packets, slowing down our DNS server. Please tell me that there is something to be done, it can't be that Cisco have put a "Pro" devise out where only 9 out of 10 ports work and that you can not host Web, email or CRM servers because there is no port forwarding, not to mention it only supports IE browsers for SSL.
I don't mean to sound cranky, but we have spend so much time trying to get this devise to work, please help. (I wish I could give you some logs, but logging doesn't seem to work either)

OpenVPN IPv6 client, IPv4 server, Port forwarding?

I'd like to use an anonymous VPN with OpenVPN, but my new ISP only gives IPv6 addresses and IPv4 only via DualStack lite (4in6).
As a consequence, my machine is only reachable with IPv6 Port Forwarding.
The VPN-Provider only supports IPv4.
Now the question:
Can I reach my machine through IPv6 Port forwarding with OpenVPN and get a static IPv4 and Port forwarding(v4) from him?
As I see it:
I should be able to establish a connection with the VPN. I get a static address and the provider is forwarding the ports. Because I made the connection TO him it doesn't matter which ports are open on my side. Right?
Or is it the other way around, that both need ports that can be forwarded?

I guess you mean forwarding from WAN (server) to LAN (client) (both static IPs)?
(Server must be your Internet gw/router.)
NAT requires the ipfw firewall running so you need to add these ports (TCP? and/or UDP?) to the "allowed in" list for the server public/WAN IP. Turn on logging of denied packets to see what happens.

Linksys RV016 and two WANs (cable+DSL)

Is there any good description how to configure Linksys RV016 for two WANs (cable+DSL)? It looks like switching between those two connections not splitting what is set for WAN1 and what is set for WAN2.
I set load balancing as
- WAN1 (cable) all HTTP up/donw should go there
- WAN2 (DSL) GTalk, IMs, SMTP, POP3, IMAP up/down should go there
but looks like is not working that way.
When I will go to speedtest.net and test a connection I always get less amount then connected directly through cable :\ Also when people try to use any session or IP sensitive web site it doesn't let them to log in because session was expired (based on IP) or IP was changed.
Thanks for any help.

Enrique,
On the RV082:
System Management-> Dual-WAN
Change to Load Balance (Auto Mode) At the bottom of the page you will now see Protocol Binding
Select HTTPS [TCP/443~443] from the dropdown
Select the source IP or IP range: (i.e. 192.168.1.100 to 150) This will bind HTTPS for any LAN device that uses an IP in this range.
Select the Destination IP: Usually leave at 0.0.0.0 to 0.0.0.0 for ALL destinations
Select the Interface to bind the protocol to (WAN1 or WAN2)
Check the Enable box and Add to list. Save Settings at bottom of page.
On the RV016:
System Management-> Multi-WAN
Look for Interface Setting and select Edit for WAN1.
Follow the steps from above.
Please let us know if this helps or if you need further assistance.

RV016 or RV082 expandable?

The RV082 (8-port model) manual says it is expandable but it does not mention where to connect the links between the first/second device to facilitate expansion.
The RV016 (16-port model) manual does not mention whether it is expandable.
Are either of these models expandable - either with another RV082/RV016 or a common switch? If yes do I just connect the secondary router/switch to an active LAN port on the original router? - or do I use the DMZ port?

Hello David,
I have checked the admin guide and datasheet but the word "expandable" but I couldn't not find it there. I am assuming the same context you are, in the sense you may connect additional devices to the unit. The RV082 features dual WAN and DMZ, while the RV016 features upto 7 WANS and the DMZ.
There is not a common switch or a device pairing packaged with the units. However, any of the small business switches operate with these units.
The DMZ function is neat, as you may set the DMZ host which is a private IP mapped to a public IP. This is much like a 1-1 NAT. You may also configure "DMZ subnet" where you can specify IP addresses from your public block then assign a device on your LAN the same public IP.
The router itself does not have any expansion modules or slots. It basically "is what it is". You may connect other devices such as switches, hubs, access points, etc to the LAN ports.
-Tom
Please rate helpful posts

RV320 - Dual WAN - Load Balance Problem

Hi all,
I've just bought a RV320 Dual WAN router an try to get it running. My network setup looks lice the picture attached.
I have 2 WAN Connections:
- Router 1 (16Mbit Down / 512kbit up) - no public WAN IP
- Router 2 (3 Mbit Down / 512kbit up) - Fixed public IP
Router 1 ist connected to WAN1 and router 2 to WAN2 port on the RV320.
I have enabled load balancing mode.
Qustions:
1.
I want WAN1 to be the primary line to be used until capacity reached.
Currently for some reason I don't understand the cisco always uses WAN2.
That's not good as all browsing and downloading is limited to 3mbit.
When I switch to "fail-over" mode and set primry live to WAN1 that works, but WAN2 is not kept alive.
2.
I am using VOIP and need to route all VOIP traffic to WAN2 interface.
The best would be to tell the router IP 192.168.177.9 (voip phone) should use WAN2. So far I didn't figure out how to do that.
Can I put VOIP into one VLAN group and allocated VLAN to one specific WAN interface?
Brgds

So, you can hear the phone ringing and answer it? which means that SIP pakets are coming through WAN to LAN and well redirected to the phone IP, but you cannot hear after that, which means that there could be a problem with the RTP packets.
If you have problem only with the incoming calls and not the outgoing, than try enable/disable SIP ALG (Firewall). If that doesn't fix the issue, try to allow (or even forward) from WAN to LAN RDP - UDP ports 16384-32767 to the phone IP.
Regards,
Kremena

RV016 VLAN support

I was looking at the RV016, thinking that it might be perfect for a situation I have, and there seems to be many references in various forums for simpleVLAN support for this model, i.e. designating a range of physical ports to a VLAN. But the documentation on Cisco's site for this model makes no mention of VLAN support at all. Has it been removed from this model for some reason? Was this a feature on the pre-merger Linksys version that is now gone, or is the feature undocumented for some reason?

Hi Daniel,
You need to configure multiple subnets - in order to have 2 IP ranges.
Thann you need to chose different VLANs on 2 ports of RV016 (Port Management > Port Setup) - for example VLAN1 on port1 and VLAN2 on port 2 - thus you will separate the trafic on the 2 ports. You can connect your LAN on port1 and the AP for guest wifi on port2. Both subnets will have access to i-net, but not one to each other.
Regards,
Kremena
*Please rate the Post so other will know when an answer has been found.

Router Linksys RV082, RV016 https problems

Problemas con Cisco Linksys RV082 y RV016, en paginas que manejan https, ejemplo www.logmein.com al iniciar sesión me regresa de nuevo a la pagina inicia de inicio de sesión, al investigar encuentro que es una posible suplantación de identidad, por la fucnión que tiene el RV de balancear la carga ya que cambia de un modem a otro modem que este mas libre, esto es uno de los problemas con los que me encontrado y aun no he podido solucionar en un buen tiempo, conocera alguien como arreglar este problemon.
Gracias de antemano.
Problems with Linksys RV082 and RV016 Cisco in pages that handle https, eg when logging www.logmein.com returns me back to the Home page of login, I find it when investigating a possible identity theft, the fucnión VR has the load balance as it changes from a modem to another modem that is more free, this is one of the problems I found and I have not been solved in a while, someone will know how to fix this big problem .
Thanks in advance.

Enrique,
On the RV082:
System Management-> Dual-WAN
Change to Load Balance (Auto Mode) At the bottom of the page you will now see Protocol Binding
Select HTTPS [TCP/443~443] from the dropdown
Select the source IP or IP range: (i.e. 192.168.1.100 to 150) This will bind HTTPS for any LAN device that uses an IP in this range.
Select the Destination IP: Usually leave at 0.0.0.0 to 0.0.0.0 for ALL destinations
Select the Interface to bind the protocol to (WAN1 or WAN2)
Check the Enable box and Add to list. Save Settings at bottom of page.
On the RV016:
System Management-> Multi-WAN
Look for Interface Setting and select Edit for WAN1.
Follow the steps from above.
Please let us know if this helps or if you need further assistance.

Small Office Router RV08/016 or 891 -which appropriate?

I am not certain this is correct forum, but I doubt sales techs will be able to provide requested info. I am a knowledgable newbie, but not formally trained. After 6 or 7 years, the old Linksys died and am looking to upgrade hardware and inet access. It is a small, professional office, at most 3-5 people (on a seasonal basis). First criteria is, at a minimum, dual WAN access for reliability. We are a ship without a rudder without internet access. Questions:
1. According to Router Performance table, dated 11/3/2009, the 890 series supports 51.2 Mbps with no services. Is that figure 1. per port in each direction, 2. per port with both directions combined, or 3. is it some combo of both WAN ports.
1.A. According to testing at SmallNetBuilder, the RV 08 & 016 have a simultaneous throughput of about 150 Mbps. Considering the 890 is about twice as expensive as the RV08/016, can someone help me understand why?
1.B. I may add FIOS at 25/25 Mbps as a second WAN, so either RVs or 891 should handle the line speed. Am I correct that the 891 is the option which has 2 GbE WAN ports? FIOS tech has said they can run an ethernet line in from the outside box, while the DSL is also ethernet.
2. I think the 891 has more options to configure the interaction between the 2 WANs, but that very configurability makes me nervous and doubt my technical skills. I really do not mind the CLI, but have no experience with Cisco's OS. Can anyone recommend a good book or is the documentation on the CISCO website usually adequate?
2.A. I understand the RVs will use either WAN or the survivor if one fails, but that the RVs will not bond the speeds of each WAN so that the throughput to the WAN is the speed of the WAN being used by the RVs. Will the 891 bond the 2 WANS so that total throughput is the combined speed of both WANs?
2.B. If the answer is yes, will I still have to direct that https access proceed only through one WAN so that recipients on the WEB, such as banks and government agencies, are not confused by the bonding process?
3. Does the 891 provide more ways to make use of a dual WAN situation? If I do not go with the 891, I will probably buy the RV016 for the multiple WANS, as 3G seems interesting as a backup service.
3.A. As this location is a home office, does the 891 afford the option of creating time-based rule sets for the bonding of the WANS so that during daytime a configuration suitable for the office is used and at night a configuration suitable for speed and family enjoyment is used?
4. Is it possible to use the USB port as an additional WAN port by attaching a USB 3G modem? I think the answer is no, but maybe I am wrong.
5. The 891 info page says something about the 891 having a dial-up backup ability. Is that an additional WAN port (RJ45?) in addition to the 2 WAN ports?
6. I have 2 VOIP lines running over a dedicated DSL line at 3M/768k. Does either the RV or the 890 provide better support for VOIP? I plan on buying a CISCO Series 300 managed switch to plug into the router. Does either router work better with the switch?
7. Except for the possible multi WAN bonding by the 891 and the VOIP issue, the RVs seem to provide most of what I need for less cost than the 891, but since I have no experience with routers at this level, is someone with experience willing to point out some of the benefits I will get from the 891 which I will not have with the RVs?
Thank you to anyone who wades through this post (even if you do not respond, though responses are exceedingly appreciated).

1. According to Router Performance table, dated 11/3/2009, the 890 series supports 51.2 Mbps with no services. Is that figure 1. per port in each direction, 2. per port with both directions combined, or 3. is it some combo of both WAN ports.
The value of 51.2 Mbps, with CEF enabled, expressed in HALF duplex and no encryption. Half the value and you'll get the WAN speed expressed in Full duplex OR with encryption. Half this value further and you'll get the WAN speed expressed in Full Duplex AND with encryption.
Few things about the 890:
1. PoE support with the purchase of a daughterboard and a separate power supply. Only 4 (out of 8) LAN ports will have PoE support.
2. Supports up to 14 VLANs (including VLAN 1).
3. 8 Layer 2 FastEthernet ports, 1 GigabitEthernet port and 1 WAN port.
4. Supports Zone Based Firewall (ZBW).
2. I think the 891 has more options to configure the interaction between the 2 WANs, but that very configurability makes me nervous and doubt my technical skills. I really do not mind the CLI, but have no experience with Cisco's OS. Can anyone recommend a good book or is the documentation on the CISCO website usually adequate?
As long as you are comfortable with configuring the 890 with CLI you can take steps in getting there. Like what your are doing now, posting your questions in this forum, alot of people can help you with your issues if you provide us with a description of what you are trying to do.
3. Does the 891 provide more ways to make use of a dual WAN situation? If I do not go with the 891, I will probably buy the RV016 for the multiple WANS, as 3G seems interesting as a backup service.
I don't think the 890 supports dual WAN connection. The 890 does not have a 3G upgrade option.
3.A. As this location is a home office, does the 891 afford the option of creating time-based rule sets for the bonding of the WANS so that during daytime a configuration suitable for the office is used and at night a configuration suitable for speed and family enjoyment is used?
Heck yeah. You can create a time-based Access Control List (ACL) and attach this to your WAN link. As long as the time and date are correct, of course.
4. Is it possible to use the USB port as an additional WAN port by attaching a USB 3G modem? I think the answer is no, but maybe I am wrong.
The USB port of the 890 is predominantly used for data transfer of files to-and-from the USB stick. It's not designed as a "LAN/WAN" link. It's also useful in case the firmware of your router gets corrupted because you can boot the router's IOS from a specially formatted USB stick.

RV016 port forwarding by WAN port?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for