Wan port seems to be out of service

Hi,
when I connect my xDSL box on the wan port of my airport extreme, no Internet access is available.
when I connect my xDSL box on a lan port of my airport extreme, Internet access is available (same cable, same options)
Is my wan port out of order ? What can I do to be sure of this ?
thanks

Generally, a 5th generation iPod will charge to about 80% in roughly an hour, at which point the iPod will show the iPod as charged. But then it will trickle charge the remaining 20% or so over the next 3-4 hours. So your times are not out of line really.
My original 5th gen 30GB iPod typically only gets about 3-5 hours of playing time, so your 7 hours seems great to me. And I keep the backlight off, don't jump around, don't play videos etc.
I haven't had my new 80GB long enough to get a feel for playing time yet.
Patrick

Similar Messages

CSCts69270 - CCX CTI ports may stuck in out-of-service state when UCM Upgrade/Restart

Symptom:
CCX CTI ports (RP & IVR) may stuck in out-of-service state during CUCM upgrade or Restart.
Conditions:
During CUCM upgrade the The UCCX CTI ports (RoutePoint Triggers and few IVR ports) went into out-of-service state .
This condition may happen during CUCM upgrade process or CUCM nodes restart. When this happens;
The CUCM sate of down ports is "Registered".
The UCCX state of down ports is "Out of Service"
This was tested on following Release branch;
CUCM Version: 8.6.2.10000-30
UCCX Version: 8.5.1.11001-35
JTAPI Version: 8.6(2.10000)-2
CUCM is a 15 Nodes cluster over the LAN with 10 subscriber nodes.
UCCX is a 2 Nodes-HA Cluster, with one Route point, and 300 ICT IVR ports.
Workaround:
After Upgrade completes, restart of CTIManager service from the CUCM nodes serving the CCX.
Last Modified:
Aug 26,2013
Symptom:
CCX CTI ports (RP & IVR) may stuck in out-of-service state during CUCM upgrade or Restart.
Conditions:
During CUCM upgrade the The UCCX CTI ports (RoutePoint Triggers and few IVR ports) went into out-of-service state .
This condition may happen during CUCM upgrade process or CUCM nodes restart. When this happens;
The CUCM sate of down ports is "Registered".
The UCCX state of down ports is "Out of Service"
This was tested on following Release branch;
CUCM Version: 8.6.2.10000-30
UCCX Version: 8.5.1.11001-35
JTAPI Version: 8.6(2.10000)-2
CUCM is a 15 Nodes cluster over the LAN with 10 subscriber nodes.
UCCX is a 2 Nodes-HA Cluster, with one Route point, and 300 ICT IVR ports.
Workaround:
After Upgrade completes, restart of CTIManager service from the CUCM nodes serving the CCX.
Last Modified:
Aug 26,2013
Known Affected Releases:
(0)
Known Fixed Releases:
(0)

Hello r.mata, do you have a question about this bug? Regards, Wes

WRT400N WAN port doesn't work.

Nothing that I connect to the WAN port seems to get the internet LED to illuminate. I have a DHCP access to a Motorola CPEi 150 which works great if I connect to it directly with a netbook or if I use a dlink WRB-2310 router but it doesn't ever seem to register with the WRT400N WAN port. I've even tried connecting the WAN port to the dlink and still no LED or address from the DHCP server. It's a recently bought this Linksys-refurbished router and I think it will cost more to send it back that it cost to get. Is there an easy way to determine if the WAN port works at all without constantly disconnecting the internet in my house as family members are getting a bit upset with me.

I tried connecting a LAN port to the WAN port and it worked. I then connected the WAN port to the LAN port of a DLink router in series and I could communicate with the internet. I then connected it directly to the Motorola CPEi 150 and the port showed nothing. I then tried to repeat my steps and could not get any responce on the WAN port even with rebooting the router and reverting to factory defaults. The WAN port appears to have intermitten problems. I will attempt to troubleshoot some more but I may have to give up.

Save running-config out WAN port?

Hi all. As I look at the thread headings fo rthe other posts I'm struck by how simple my request must seem I hope this is an easy one!
Using 891W routers, I would like to be able to save the running-config out the WAN port (gig0). The most common scenario is that I am SSH'd into a router, but the LAN doesn't have a TFTP server nor is it ideal to put one in there. So I want to save the routers config to myself here somehow
The site that has the rotuer I want to save from is connected via L2L IPSec VPN to head office, and through that tunnel I can ping, RDP, whatever. However, I cannot save the running-config even to a machine on that LAN that has a TFTP server. It just seems TFTP is blocked by default from sending anything out on the WAN port. I've enabled all traffic between these two routers in the ZBFW, but still it doesn't work. I think blocking TFTP from sending out the WAN port might be hard-coded into the IOS or something.
Anybody have thoughts on this? Thank you.

Hi Julio,
Self zones in use are only the OUT-SELF. No SELF-OUT. The L2L VPN works now. The ZBFW setup to allow the VPN to work is one ACL within a 2nd class map inside the OUTSIDE-INSIDE policy map allowing all traffic from one LAN network to the other and this is set on both routers (inversing the network IDs of course). Also to allow the VPN tunnel itself to form, there is an ACL in a 2nd class map on within the OUT-SELF policy map, which allows traffic between the two rouer WAN port IP's (allowing port 500, non500, and all esp).
But what confuses me is this. If I edit that ACL governing the two VPN endpoints, so that instead of just port 500 and such I also say to permit ip any any, I can for example SSH from one router CLI to the other router CLI, whereas without adding this entry to the ACL, I cannot so I know failry surely that this perit ip any any opens any traffic between the two routers.
But this is likely where my lack of understanding of VPN comes in. I imagine I am not actually sending TFTP files through the VPN then...in effect I'm trying to send a TFTP file from one router, to the LAN side of the other router. Perhaps not possible?
I'm actally confusing myself here the more I type. I'll leave this post for now, read Alain's and will reply there.

How to find out the service that consumes a given port?

If we want to check if a given port is open on a given host, we do
telnet hostname port-number
If this given port is open, that means a service is consuming this port. How to identify which
service is consuming this open port?
Thanks!

Hi,
Please check the file /etc/services.
In this file you will find that which port is occupied by which services. This file contains all services details (OS+ SAP also).
Please refer to below doc for the details about the standard ports used by SAP applications.
https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/go/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/4e515a43-0e01-0010-2da1-9bcc452c280b
With Regards,
Saurabh

Macs with Filesharing Turned on Appearing on Networks Through the WAN Port

I am trying to find out why it is that Macs that have filesharing turned on are appearing on people's network even when they are not on the same LAN.
We run a small ISP in our town and have about 180 client sites that we service. I had a call from a client panicking because he could suddenly see unknown devices showing up in the Finder under Shared Devices. He could even see someone else's iTunes Library available for sharing, etc. This of course makes no sense, because although obviously all clients are technically on the same physical network, each client site has its own router, and is therefore behind a router.
(And please do not comment about people getting onto his Wi-Fi, or else the bug in the Mac OS that sometimes does not release devices from the shared devices section even after they are gone from the network. This is NOT any of these situations. Please read on...).
Initially I was convinced that he has opened up some port that he should not have. To test this I went to this client site, reset the router to clear any unwanted programming and plugged in my Mac directly into the WAN port of his router. And sure enough I appeared on his network. If I turned filesharing off, then I would disappear (which makes sense), but point is that with filesharing turned on, I seemed to be going through the router's firewall. Also interestingly enough, this penetration only seemed to be in one direction. That is WAN -> LAN, but not LAN -> WAN (I could not ever see any of HIS machines). Also, while I would appear on his network, I was not accessible by him. He could not actually connect to me.
Is this happening because of Bonjour? If so, can I block Bonjour by closing some ports or protocols? But I also do not want to do that if it will cause any other applications from getting through that should be getting through (although I do not understand why Bonjour should be broadcasting through a firewall anyway).
Thank you in advance for any comments.

The best test I can suggest is to access when the Security Gateway is up and you are on the same LAN network as the ADT setup. If that works, unless the feeds are routed through some ADT server, the WAN side can be tested next. The ADT Gateway will not have a public IP for you to access. Do you have a link to a manual, or a the ADT model number of the gateway, so I can take a look at the setup guide?
The normal setup is
ISP <-> WAN IP <LAN Router/Gateway/Modem> <-> AEBS <Ethernet> ADT Gateway (LAN IP).
LAN IPs are typically hidden from the world and are private IPs like 192.168.1.x ro 192.168.0.x or 10.x.x.x or 172.16.x.x.

EA2700 WAN PORT open to the world by default?

I just noticed last night that my EA2700 router was accessible on the WAN port, from the Internet, on ports 80 and 53. I am running router firmware 1.0.14 and the update utility reports that there is no newer version.
Remote management is NOT enabled (it defaults to port 8080 anyway) and I enabled and disabled it for good measure. Rebooted a few times, too.
I then enabled and disabled the regular admin interface on HTTPS and turned off HTTP. That enabled the admin interface on port 443, but still left it enabled on port 80. And now both port 80 and 443 were accessible outside the firewall! And now I couldn't turn off port 443!
I disabled UPnP and rebooted and still the ports were open to the Internet.
Needless to say, I was pretty horrified by this discovery.
I only leave one port forwarded, port 22, to SSH on an internal box. That is the only hole through my firewall I ever expect to see.
As a fix for this problem, I added three new port forwards on port 80, port 53 and port 443, and mapped them all to a random port on an unused IP on my internal network. THIS and ONLY this finally made ports 80, 53, and 443 inaccessible from the Internet at large.
What's going on here? It seems hard to believe that EVERY EA2700 device would have this issue or this would've come out long ago. Any ideas?

https://superevr.com/blog/2013/dont-use-linksys-routers/

Can't configure both WAN ports on 1811 with SDM

Hi,
We recently procured an 1811 router to replace a SOHO linksys at a store we service. We needed redundant WAN interfaces to use the DSL as a backup to the main cable connection, and a Linksys RV082, while doing the job when it actually worked, died repeatedly. We decided after looking at the 1811's feature set to just get the Cisco and be done with it and not monkey with SOHO gear anymore.
Where I'm having difficulty is SDM won't let me configure both WAN interfaces from the GUI, it only allows me to configure one. I have it configured, and the router is working nicely in the test lab but I need to get that other interface configured and failover enabled before I can put this thing into production.
What am I doing wrong? Do I need to suck it up and learn IOS?
Thanks,
Todd Phipps
Certco, Inc.

I ended up figuring out the IOS commands to enable one fastethernet port as a primary and the other one as a backup (running both cable and DSL for redundancy; it's a grocery store that runs electronic transactions over IP so 100% availability is a must).
The trouble I was running into in SDM is that while it would allow me to configure one WAN port through the GUI, the config options for the second one were grayed out. Now that both are configured through IOS the edit buttons for both WAN interfaces appear normally in SDM. It's almost as if Cisco didn't want users to be able to configure both interfaces graphically for initial setup.
Now just to test it at the site before the store opens to see if the failover works...
Todd

Troubleshooting Airport Extreme's wan port?

I have an Airport Extreme base station that doesn't seem to be communicating through its WAN port. Both Apple and Windoze computers can connect to it, wired or wirelessly, but I am unable to make the base station communicate with a gateway device, a (PPoE) DSL modem. My brother (whose device this is) was having the same problem with his cable modem.
As the Airport boots, the link light on the WAN port blinks green a couple of times, only instantaneously, but otherwise remains dark. Once it's booted, the status light blinks amber. And of course there is no throughput, no connectivity to the Internet.
I also have a LinkSys WiFi router that works perfectly using the same gateway device and the same ethernet cable, which gives me to believe both the modem and the cable are in proper working order. All the configuration information I'm entering into the Airport's web interface I'm cut and pasting from the same text file I habitually use to the LinkSys router (to cut down on clerical errors). So presuming it's configured properly, presuming the cable and the gateway aren't at fault, I have to think the WAN port has given up the ghost.
So I thought to ask the Apple cognoscenti if they agree with my diagnosis. Is there a diagnostic I'm overlooking? Do the WAN ports on these devices have a history of being problematic?
TIA
Slanjevar!

I have discovered the chief problem was that the Airport doesn't take kindly to unresolved/unacknowledged errors/conditions under the Status button on the Summary page of the Airport utility. It was regarding "extended mode" as an abnormality requiring acknowledgment, as well as my switching off all wireless security, as a temporary diagnostic measure. Once I'd told it to 'Ignore' those conditions, I got both a solid green status light and a steady green link light on the WAN port.
However, it still isn't passing data.
As I was stumbling around in the Airport utility's GUI (before resolving the "start button" problem), I noticed it had an "Extend a wireless network" mode. Since what my brother was after in the first place was getting stronger signal to the far end of the house, I asked if this wouldn't better suit his needs than substituting the Airport for his current (underpowered?) WiFi router. He agreed, so I've changed my focus to setting up the Airport as an 'extender.'
Now, reconfigured in 'extender' mode, its 'Status' on the GUI's 'Summary' page shows 'Normal' and the status light is steady green. The GUI for my WRT54 (with DD-WRT firmware) shows it is authenticated and joined to the network, as both a LAN and a wireless client. And the Airport's logs concur: "Joined BSS [WRT54's MAC]" and "Installed unicast TKIP key for authenticator [WRT54's MAC]".
I've done this with the Airport either using DHCP or with a statically configured IP address to see if it made any difference. It does not, either to its ability to join the network or to its (lack of) throughput. So every indication I can find confirms it is a connected and fully functioning member of my network.
I also have an XPSP3 box connected to one of the LAN ports on the Airport. The NICs on both ends show a solid green link light. The Airport's logs acknowledge that the XP box is connected: "Connection accepted from [::ffff:192.168.1.3]". And the XP box can 'ping' the Airport. All of which spells "connected" to me.
However, the XP box can neither draw an IP address (the Airport's DHCP clients list remains empty) nor communicate with anything upstream of the Airport (which it only can do once I have given it a static IP address). If I try to tracert or pathping from the XP box to the WRT54 (via the Airport), it stalls out at the Airport. The response is the same whether I have the Airport's WAN port connected to a LAN port on the WRT54 or not.
Address scheme-wise, my WiFi router (WRT54) is on 192.168.1.1. The XP box that I have connected to the Airport via ethernet has a reserved IP of 192.168.1.3, but now is configured statically to that address because the Airport (seemingly) does not support it contacting the DHCP server. The Airport consistently had been drawing the first available address from the DHCP pool, 192.168.1.10, but now I have it statically configured to .100 because my brother doesn't use DHCP reservations on his network, and I'm replicating how he will configure it to leave nothing to chance. Having a static address saves him grief having to figure out what its address has become should the Airport utility not be able to find it (which seems to be its norm) and he has to connect manually through the Airport utility.
I've spent almost every waking minute tinkering with this thing since midday yesterday and I've not yet seen evidence that the Airport has passed so much as a single bit of data. And it isn't just the WAN port, it doesn't want to pass anything wirelessly either. This thing is about to get my goat. Remind me never again to offer my brother a favor.
Any thoughts? Humorous anecdotes? Naughty limericks?
EDIT:
I also have a network detector on my cell phone than can identify every device, wireless or otherwise, on the network its connected to. But it does not "see" either the Airport or, naturally, the XP box beyond it.

Performance of WAN Port

Hi there,
I ordered a 120 Mbit/s line from my provider. After some speed issues I had a online session with the service provider today. I was getting 80-90 Mbit/s ....
He advised me to take out the AirPort Extreme between the Cable Modem and my Mac Mini. First of all I did not think this will bring any improvement since the Modem is GBit Ethernet and the Mac Mini and Airport Extreme too....
As he insisted on that I took it out and what happened? Internet performance went up from 80-90 to 110-115 Mbits.
So actually there is a real cut in performance - is this a general performance limitation, like firewall/nat or whatever is making airport busy and not letting trough more than 100 Mbit .... or is the WAN port only 100Mbit?
Is there anything to tune?
Oh by the way the extreme is 2 weeks old - so it is latest model (MC)
Thanks in advance!

I've owned several routers from different manufacturers and have worked with several Internet service providers and have found that the routing process will cause, on average, a 15-20% drop in speed when compared to a straight through connection from the modem to a computer. Sometimes, its a bit more loss and sometimes a bit less.
There is no doubt that the the NAT firewall accounts for some of this loss in the routing process and the process of sharing a single connection from the modem is likely to cause some loss as well.
If had a 100 Mpbs service from the provider, I would expect on average to see speeds in the 80-85 Mbps range using an ethernet connection through the router. The Internet connection speed often varies on most providers during the day depending on the number of users on the system.
If you are talking about wireless speed, there is more speed loss here through the router due to the security encryption process.
Now, the results of other users may vary. Hopefully, they will post to give us more perspective. Based on the different routers I've used with different providers, I would say that your results are in the range that I would expect.

ISA500 tagged WAN port

Hello,
I'm currently evaluating an ISA570W firewall.
The use case is to deploy it as an entry level firewall on FTTH internet access lines.
The ISP provides a CPE that requires internet trafic to be tagged on a specific VLAN.
I was a bit suprise when, after trying this configuration, finding out that the WAN port on the ISA500 can only be put in access mode.
Which effectively makes this device unusable.
Is there another way to set one of the ethernet interface in trunk mode and put it in the WAN zone with DHCP client enabled?
Thanks,

so I digged a bit further and found a document from Cisco's knowledgebase that describes steps by steps instructions for the WAN port: http://sbkb.cisco.com/CiscoSB/Loginr.aspx?login=1&pid=2&app=search&vw=1&articleid=3719
searching for vlan tag showed me a screen that allowed the setting of a tagged vlan on the WAN port but only available for PPPoE IP address assignement.
the VLAN tag option is not available with "DHCP Client" IP address assignement.
Is this something we could see in a future firmware release?
From what I've seen tagged vlan on the WAN port is a typical configuration requirement for FTTH services here in Switzerland.
Thanks,

Wan port question

Could someone explain to me the Ethernet wan port menu. I'm having a lot of connection problems with Airplay. It keeps dropping and coming back on.
I checked with my ISP and the signal (cable) is 100% stable so the problem has to be my AE.
If I change the settings to 10Mbps/half Duplex, it seems to work ok for a while. But Automatic is a definite no-no.
Why all those choices, especially half and full duplex and what do they mean in terms of overall performance ?
Thx

My question to you is did this always happen or just started happening with this modem & AirPort base station. What is the exact model of your AirPort? How about the modem?
This has always happened since installation 3 months ago
AE 1143 - Modem is : Motorola SB5101
Is 8 Mbps the maximum rated download speed that your ISP is providing you for Internet service?
Yes
Is 8 Mbps the maximum rated download speed that your ISP is providing you for Internet service?
Speed test (http://www.speedtest.net/)
up: 8.17 - down: 1.02
Changing the WAN Ethernet port speed will do nothing to improve AirPlay's performance.
But it does ! With lower speed = less drop in feed. Or maybe it's just the fact that I change from one to another.

Speed limitation on Time Capsule Ethernet WAN port

I have a Time Capsule 2TB model A1409 that is connected to a Motorola Cable Modem SBV5121 and only connects to it ("green light") when the Ethernet WAN port is set to 10 Mbps/Half Duplex (fastest speed - average 5 Mbps for download) or 10 Mbps/Full Duplex (slowest speed - average 3 Mbps for download). No other mode can get a connection "green light". Time capsule software is 7.6.1.
Today I connected a Cisco Linksys E2500 router to the same cable modem and download speed increased to 10 Mbps which is what I am paying for my ISP. I haven't even touched the ethernet WAN port configuration. Straight forward.
I would be grateful if someone could point out a configuration change that would allow my TC to connect as fast as this Cisco router.

fcamineiro wrote:
It works fine in Bridge Mode with a Thomson Integrated Modem/Router. But I don't want to use this configuration since I won't be able to use the TC's Guest Network.
Just tried connecting with Cisco's ethernet cable but remained the same.
Is it possible to bridge the Thomson??
Stick a small cheapo switch between the TC and Morotola and see if that fixes it.. as I said, not all chips quite talk to each other.. even in this day and age.
And Motorola cable modems seem to have more problems than most .. this is not new to me.

Windows 7 RC turns off the Fios MI424WR (Rev E) Coax WAN port (and can't turn it back on)

Windows 7 RC (and probably Visa) displays the Fios router as an Icon when you open the Network Icon. If you right-click the Fios router you get a menu which contains "disable". If you select "disable", the Fios router does exactly that and your Internet Connection will be down.
So, the obvious thing to do is "enable" from the same menu, right? Well, in my experience, when you select the "enable", the Fios router turns on the Ethernet WAN port. Which is fine if your router is connected to your ONT via ethernet. Unfortunately, the most common way Verizon connects their router to the ONT is via Coax!
You can easily fix this by logging onto the Fios router and re-enable the Coax WAN port via Main / Network Connections / Broadband Connection (Coax). However, I have not found a way to re-enable the Coax Wan port from within Windows 7.
I don't know if the bug is in the Fios router or in Windows 7 RC, but I bet I'm not the only one that has experienced this problem. The first time it happened, the Verizon tech told me to press the reset button on the router. This fixed the problem, but wipped out all my custom settings.
Has anyone else seen this behavior?
Message Edited by RATickle on 07-06-2009 10:57 AM

*Putting on more pressure*
What this thread is about is, the least of your problems...
#1 If UPnP in on in the router, with an UPnP aware client users can open ports in the router without ever being asked for the user name and password of the router.
And keep in mind: YOU are responsible for the traffic that flows over that router. This is no matter to take lightly. For example if someone is on your network downloading/uploading songs (uTorrent one of many UPnP aware apps). The RIAA goes after your ISP, because it came from their network. Then ISP comes after you, because it came from your network.
Depending on how good this/these people are, good luck finding that person (or people)....
#2 There is a rule of how to forward ports in your router to allow users to connect to you. "Once you've forwarded a Port to ONE IP address, you CAN NOT use it with any other IP address."
But with most routers about UPnP, all you know about UPnP it is either On or Off (You have no idea of what ports are being forwarded to an IP Address).
So, I have to wonder how you will avoid over lapping ports.
#3 At http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/tip/0,289483,sid14_gci863906,00.html
They talk about Improving performance and security by disabling unneeded services, and they point http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/servicecfg.htm
Then at http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/servicecfg.htm they say that UPnP is an unneeded service.
If you are the original poster (OP) and your issue is solved, please remember to click the "Solution?" button so that others can more easily find it. If anyone has been helpful to you, please show your appreciation by clicking the "Kudos" button.

Activity logging for WAN port on WRT1900ac

Hi everybody, I'm looking to monitor the activity on the WAN port. When the WAN goes on/off line, to find out when I loose connection with my internet provider. I know where to monitor the use of the ports being used, but I'm looking specific to the connects / disconnects on my WAN port towards my provider. Has anybody have suggestions?
John

What region are you located?
Has a Factory Reset been performed?
Was a Factory Reset performed before and after any firmware updates then set up from scratch?
Internet Service Provider and Modem Configurations
What ISP Service do you have? Cable or DSL?
What ISP Modem Mfr. and model # do you have?
Is ISP Modem/Service using Dynamic or Static WAN IP addressing?
What ISP Modem service link speeds UP and Down do you have?
Check cable between Modem and Router, swap out to be sure. Link>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAT6 is recommended.
Check ISP MTU requirements, Cable is usually 1500, DSL is around 1492 down to 1472. Call the ISP and ask.
http://kb.linksys.com/Linksys/ukp.aspx?vw=1&docid=88e63d78588142e6bb68e22d7faf2046_Configuring_the_M...
I recommend that you have your ISP check the cabling going to the ISP modem, check signal levels going to the ISP modem. For cable Internet, RG-6 coaxial cable is needed, not RG-59. Check for t.v. line splitters and remove them as they can introduce noise on the line and lower the signal going to the ISP modem. Connecting to the ISP modem could result in a false positive as the signal to the modem could be just enough to that point then adding on a router, could see problems. Ensure modem is working well too. Bad modems are out there as well. The router operation is dependent upon getting good data flow from the ISP modem and the modem is dependent upon getting good signal from the ISP Service.
Not sure if using the following will have information on WAN port activity:
192.168.1.1\sysinfo.cgi

Wan port seems to be out of service

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for