Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    UPnP support

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Expired/Withdrawn Bounties
    363 Posts 28 Posters 407.0k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • Z
      ZPrime
      last edited by

      Changing the port (I used 2898) didn't do anything.  Here's another capture after that change. (PCAP format again)

      I'm starting to think that the SSDP packets (the response to the "M-SEARCH" queries) aren't thorough enough, since the Linksys provides more data than miniupnpd does.
      For instance, the Xbox does a discovery for WANIPConnection:

      M-SEARCH * HTTP/1.1
Host: 239.255.255.250:1900
Man: "ssdp:discover"
MX: 2
ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1

      And here are the two responses:
      PFSense/miniupnpd

      HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Cache-Control: max-age=120
ST: upnp:rootdevice
USN: uuid:00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000::upnp:rootdevice
EXT:
Server: miniupnpd/1.0
Location: http://192.168.42.1:2898/rootDesc.xml

      Linksys

      HTTP/1.1 200 OK
ST:urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1
USN:uuid:000f-6657-a36802e44090::urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1
Location: http://192.168.42.254:5431/dyndev/uuid:000f-6657-a36800e44090
Server: Custom/1.0 UPnP/1.0 Proc/Ver
EXT:
Cache-Control:max-age=1800
DATE: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 00:09:47 GMT

      As you can see, the Linksys is outputting a few parts differently.  On the Linksys, the "ST:" line is identical to the ST that the Xbox was requesting.  On PF, it is not (miniupnpd appears to only have one type of response).  I think this is the root of the problem - since the answer to the XBox's query doesn't exactly match, it doesn't attempt to connect to the daemon's unicast port and do a normal mapping routine.

      Can we change miniupnpd so it parrots back the right response?

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • S
        Skud
        last edited by

        I've tried it out and although I couldn't get the package to work, I did get it working via the manual instructions.

        So far I've tested it with:

        Limewire 4.12.4 (Rules add and delete properly)
        uTorrent (Rules add and delete properly)
        Windows Live Messenger (Again, works properly and the connection diagnostics report that I am "Connected to the internet via a uPnP Symmetric NAT"
        uPnPTest (All Passed except for rule#6 because I don't use the windows firewall service and have it disabled)

        As for the package, it would install and it was listed on the main page. I chose my interface, but nothing would ever appear in the logs. I even ran "miniupnpd with -i xl0 -a 10.1.42.1 -p 2869" and still nothing. So, I did the manual installation and it worked.

        Keep it up people!!

        Since I don't have paypal (yes, I know I'm weird and all that stuff) I'm going to have bradenmcg paypal it for me and I'll just pay him back since we work together..

        Thanks guys!!
        Riley

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • S
          Skud
          last edited by

          Spoke too soon.

          The mappings still appear to work, but when I view the states in the web interface I get the following error:

          "Fatal error: Call to undefined function: gettext() in /usr/local/www/status_upnp.php on line 57"

          Riley

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • S
            sullrich
            last edited by

            You need to upgrade to RC2e or later.  Search the forum for RC2e.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • S
              Skud
              last edited by

              Ahh, yeah, that's it..

              I had installed 2e a couple of days ago and I bet when I installed the uPnP update manaully, I overwrote some of those files..

              It's working now.

              Riley

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • Z
                ZPrime
                last edited by

                So Windows Messenger likes it, but not the 360.  Weird.

                I wonder if it would play nice with the original Xbox…

                Would this UPnP book from Intel be useful at all?  I'd donate a copy to databeestje or any of the other developers if it would help implementation along.

                I've also found a "royalty free" UPnP framework from EBS Embedded Software.  I'm inquiring about pricing as well as licensing terms - if I can just plunk down cash for a framework that is 100% compliant and it can just be dropped in, this would be fantastic… as PFSense could then lay claim to be the first open firewall that fully supports UPnP.  It might be worth doing even if the UPnP subsystem would have to be distributed separately as binaries/no source due to licensing issues.  Free/Open and most Linux flavors do this sort of thing already anyway and it doesn't hurt them at all.  That part would of course be up to our wonderful dev team though.  ;D

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • Z
                  ZPrime
                  last edited by

                  Well, EBS's royalty free framework is $12,000.  I don't mind dropping some benjamins here and there to help progress along on OSS that i believe in, but I don't have 12k to blow for pfSense, unfortunately.  ;D

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • S
                    Skud
                    last edited by

                    I've been doing a little more testing and I found that it's working 100% on my LAN interface, but it's not quite working on my WLAN interface.

                    Quick rundown

                    WLAN –> Linksys WRT54G being used as an AP. It's UPnP and DHCP are turned off. The WLAN NIC in the pfsense box is connected to port 1 on the Linksys (not the WAN port)

                    Here is the log output from a MSN Live messenger sign-on from a laptop connected to the WLAN interface. MSN reports it is connected to the internet through a NON-UPnP symmetric NAT router.

                    Aug 23 23:06:19 	miniupnpd[541]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 192.168.1.200:62964
Aug 23 23:06:19 	miniupnpd[541]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANPPPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:06:19 	miniupnpd[541]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 192.168.1.200:62964
Aug 23 23:06:19 	miniupnpd[541]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:06:18 	miniupnpd[541]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 192.168.1.200:62964
Aug 23 23:06:18 	miniupnpd[541]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANPPPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:06:18 	miniupnpd[541]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 192.168.1.200:62964
Aug 23 23:06:18 	miniupnpd[541]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:06:18 	miniupnpd[541]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 192.168.1.200:62964
Aug 23 23:06:18 	miniupnpd[541]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANPPPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:06:18 	miniupnpd[541]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 192.168.1.200:62964
Aug 23 23:06:18 	miniupnpd[541]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:06:17 	miniupnpd[541]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 192.168.1.200:62964
Aug 23 23:06:17 	miniupnpd[541]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANPPPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:06:17 	miniupnpd[541]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 192.168.1.200:62964
Aug 23 23:06:17 	miniupnpd[541]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:06:17 	miniupnpd[541]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 192.168.1.200:62964
Aug 23 23:06:17 	miniupnpd[541]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANPPPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:06:17 	miniupnpd[541]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 192.168.1.200:62964
Aug 23 23:06:17 	miniupnpd[541]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:06:16 	miniupnpd[541]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 192.168.1.200:62964
Aug 23 23:06:16 	miniupnpd[541]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANPPPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:06:16 	miniupnpd[541]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 192.168.1.200:62964
Aug 23 23:06:16 	miniupnpd[541]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1

                    Here is a WORKING sample from a MSN Live messenger sign-on from a PC connected to the LAN side. MSN reports it is connected to the internet through a UPnP Symmetric NAT router. As you can see there is quite a bit more output and more stuff going on.

                    Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: SOAPAction: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1#DeletePortMapping
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: HTTP REQUEST : POST /control/WANIPConnection (HTTP/1.1)
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: Port 42193 protocol TCP allready redirected to 10.1.42.100:42193
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: AddportMapping TCP, for 10.1.42.100, port 42193, description : miniupnpd
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: SOAPAction: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1#AddPortMapping
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: HTTP REQUEST : POST /control/WANIPConnection (HTTP/1.1)
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: GetSpecificPortMappingEntry : rhost='(null)' 42193 TCP found => 10.1.42.100:42193 desc='miniupnpd'
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: SOAPAction: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1#GetSpecificPortMappingEntry
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: HTTP REQUEST : POST /control/WANIPConnection (HTTP/1.1)
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: SOAPAction: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1#GetExternalIPAddress
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: HTTP REQUEST : POST /control/WANIPConnection (HTTP/1.1)
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: GetSpecificPortMappingEntry : rhost='(null)' 42193 TCP found => 10.1.42.100:42193 desc='miniupnpd'
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: SOAPAction: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1#GetSpecificPortMappingEntry
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: HTTP REQUEST : POST /control/WANIPConnection (HTTP/1.1)
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: AddportMapping TCP, for 10.1.42.100, port 42193, description : MSGR
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: SOAPAction: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1#AddPortMapping
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: HTTP REQUEST : POST /control/WANIPConnection (HTTP/1.1)
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: SOAPAction: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1#GetSpecificPortMappingEntry
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: HTTP REQUEST : POST /control/WANIPConnection (HTTP/1.1)
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: QueryStateVariable(0"><m:varname>ConnectionStatusAug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: SOAPAction: urn:schemas-upnp-org:control-1-0#QueryStateVariable
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: HTTP REQUEST : POST /control/WANIPConnection (HTTP/1.1)
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: QueryStateVariable(0"><m:varname>ConnectionStatusAug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: SOAPAction: urn:schemas-upnp-org:control-1-0#QueryStateVariable
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: HTTP REQUEST : POST /control/WANIPConnection (HTTP/1.1)
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 10.1.42.100:47879
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANPPPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 10.1.42.100:47879
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 10.1.42.100:47879
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANPPPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 10.1.42.100:47879
Aug 23 23:16:33 	miniupnpd[2952]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:16:32 	miniupnpd[2952]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 10.1.42.100:47879
Aug 23 23:16:32 	miniupnpd[2952]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANPPPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:16:32 	miniupnpd[2952]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 10.1.42.100:47879
Aug 23 23:16:32 	miniupnpd[2952]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:16:32 	miniupnpd[2952]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 10.1.42.100:47879
Aug 23 23:16:32 	miniupnpd[2952]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANPPPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:16:32 	miniupnpd[2952]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 10.1.42.100:47879
Aug 23 23:16:32 	miniupnpd[2952]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:16:31 	miniupnpd[2952]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 10.1.42.100:47879
Aug 23 23:16:31 	miniupnpd[2952]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANPPPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:16:31 	miniupnpd[2952]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 10.1.42.100:47879
Aug 23 23:16:31 	miniupnpd[2952]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:16:31 	miniupnpd[2952]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 10.1.42.100:47879
Aug 23 23:16:31 	miniupnpd[2952]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANPPPConnection:1
Aug 23 23:16:31 	miniupnpd[2952]: SSDP M-SEARCH packet received from 10.1.42.100:47879
Aug 23 23:16:31 	miniupnpd[2952]: ST: urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1</m:varname></m:varname>

                    I will do a little bit more testing in case it might actually be the Linksys that I am using as an AP. Maybe it is trying to proxy the UPnP packets even though it's UPnP is turned off.

                    I was originally using my pfsense box as an AP with a wireless card, but it started dropping packets tonight and I needed it. So I hooked up the linksys to use as an AP instead.

                    Thanks!!
                    Riley

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • S
                      sullrich
                      last edited by

                      Unfortunately right now the package is limited to LAN.  We can expand it down the road once we verify it works correctly on the LAN interface.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • S
                        Skud
                        last edited by

                        @sullrich:

                        Unfortunately right now the package is limited to LAN.  We can expand it down the road once we verify it works correctly on the LAN interface.

                        Gotcha..

                        Riley

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • S
                          sullrich
                          last edited by

                          Anyone else tested UPnP?

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • S
                            Superman
                            last edited by

                            I have it running!

                            It's been working fine since I got direction how to enable it. The few applications I use that employ it have worked fine so far. But without more extensive logging (I have the package version) I'm unable to tell if Microsoft Live Messenger is working or not, or if any communication is being made. My client works fine, it always did, uPnP or not.

                            Anyway all seems well so far!

                            Thanks! :D

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • S
                              Superman
                              last edited by

                              Okay a further update.

                              I could not get Windows Live Messenger to work properly. Just regular chat works fine, but video/audio doesn't. I saw in the status page that port 0 had been opened to my internal IP, which of course didn't work. Nothing more was in the regular system log, so I don't have any more information to give.

                              Just that when I received an invite and accepted it didn't show that I had on the other end, when I made an invite the invite wasn't even showing on the other end…

                              Thanks.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • Z
                                ZPrime
                                last edited by

                                Can you try nuking the package and installing the standalone by hand?  there have been some updates made to the miniupnpd binary and it's possible that whoever made the original package didn't update it when DB (i can't spell his handle right now) updated the binary on his site… ?

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • S
                                  Superman
                                  last edited by

                                  Interestingly, just as I was about to try the above suggestion, a new version of Windows Live Messenger came down the pipe. It still opens port "0" in miniupnpd but it works. At least it worked when testing it out talking to my brother who interestingly is also behind a pfSense firewall, but without miniupnpd installed! I'll have to try it out with some of my friends who are behind Linksys/D-Link or whatever variety of home routers and see if it works with them too. I think M$ must of fixed/changed something with it's upnp protocol in the newest client…

                                  (Just in case I wasn't clear enough, this is still with the package version installed.)

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • D
                                    databeestje
                                    last edited by

                                    joy!

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • R
                                      rsw686
                                      last edited by

                                      @sullrich:

                                      Anyone else tested UPnP?

                                      I tested it out on my embedded box. I used the links for the files on page 1 and 2 but those files appeared out of date. After some diff comparisons I changed the files on my RC2h box and got it working. Azerus successfully works with upnp. Only thing is I'm not seeing any logs in the system log and my firewall log is filled with accepted packets.

                                      Its late here so tomorrow if I get some free time I'm going to try and figure this out better. Anybody have the correct files for RC2h. I just don't want to overwrite bug fixes. I'll make a list of the upnp changes I found and made and see if I missed something.

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • Z
                                        ZPrime
                                        last edited by

                                        databeestje, any changes/updates in response to my XBox problems?

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • O
                                          ollopa
                                          last edited by

                                          @bradenmcg:

                                          databeestje, any changes/updates in response to my XBox problems?

                                          I'm working on UPnP as well now.  I'm not an expert but I think I understand your xbox problem a little bit.

                                          You said you're seeing SSDP (discovery protocol) go out over multicast to port 1900 (UDP) and you're getting a reply from miniupnpd.
                                          At this point the xbox should go to the returned Location: address via TCP but you noticed that it's not happening.

                                          I have a utility that I normally use to manually open ports through UPnP and it's displaying the same behavior–it's failing to understand the SSDP reply.

                                          I'm gonna work on this all day and if I get it fixed I'll post an updated miniupnpd daemon for you to try.

                                          Also I'll just put this information out there:  It's possible to do a workaround to get UPnP to function on both wireless and LAN interfaces.  Here's what I did:
                                          My wireless interface is bridged to my LAN interface (this is probably the usual setup...).  My lan interface's IP address is 192.168.1.5 and the wireless interface doesn't have an address.

                                          To get UPnP working, I set an arbitrary address on the wireless interface (ifconfig ath0 192.168.1.4).

                                          Next I manually started miniupnpd like so: 
                                          miniupnpd -i ng0 -a 192.168.1.5 -a 192.168.1.4 -p 5000

                                          That allows miniunpd to bind to both interfaces and reply to multicast SSDP packets.

                                          I don't know enough about bridging/multicast/socket programming to understand why this is neccessary to make it work, or how to fix it in miniupnpd.

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • O
                                            ollopa
                                            last edited by

                                            I understand what the problem is now with the Xbox (and potentially other applications/devices as well).

                                            miniupnpd is an incomplete implementation of UPnP.  It's lacking a lot of features that would make it a much more robust UPnP solution.

                                            I just spent some time sniffing packets and reading some (of the waay waaay too many) UPnP specs.  I'm going to add the missing functionality to miniupnpd and submit some patches to the original author.

                                            This is non-trivial.  I'd like to collect a bounty upon completion of this.  Is anyone willing to offer up a few $$?

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post
                                            Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.