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

    UPnP support

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Expired/Withdrawn Bounties
    363 Posts 28 Posters 434.6k 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.
    • E
      EldarXP
      last edited by

      no bridging on this one,

      Making all default and trying again was my first try and it didn't work for msn.
      Azerus was talking with upnp and i was able to see log with miniupnp mark on it.

      I just tried the miniupnp client for win32 and it seem that the rules are set for msn -.-; wat's going on…
      It just don't log anything and don't allow me to connect to an other computer...
      an other funny bug is it crash msn messenger on other computer when i try the video...

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

        @EldarXP:

        no bridging on this one,

        Making all default and trying again was my first try and it didn't work for msn.
        Azerus was talking with upnp and i was able to see log with miniupnp mark on it.

        I just tried the miniupnp client for win32 and it seem that the rules are set for msn -.-; wat's going on…
        It just don't log anything and don't allow me to connect to an other computer...
        an other funny bug is it crash msn messenger on other computer when i try the video...

        What version of MSN mesenger is this? I am going to download it and see if I can get it to work. Does it always forward the ports or only when you start video or voice chat as I don't have a webcam or mic on this machine.

        Also if the rules are set they should show on the miniupnpd status page. So maybe thats the issue. I will look into it. A link to the msn messenger you are using would be great.

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

          Alright I downloaded and tested out MSN Messenger. From what I can tell it works. Like said above I don't have a webcam or mic so I didn't connect to anybody, but when I click the phone button and view the miniupnpd status page I receive the following mappings:

          62514  udp  10.10.1.150  msncall (10.10.1.150:14696) 62514 UDP
          50735 tcp 10.10.1.150 msncall (10.10.1.150:9306) 50735 TCP

          Using the miniupnpd client it shows:

          00 - UDP 62514->10.10.1.150:14696      enabled=1 leaseDuration=0
              desc='msncall (10.10.1.150:14696) 62514 UDP' rHost=''
          01 - TCP 50735->10.10.1.150:9306        enabled=1 leaseDuration=0
              desc='msncall (10.10.1.150:9306) 50735 TCP' rHost=''

          What would be helpful is the printout from the miniupnpd client showing the rules created. I still don't get how it shows them but the pfSense miniupnpd status page doesn't.

          You are using version 1.0.1 and miniupnpd package 20061110 correct? At the very least you need to be on pfSense 1.0.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • E
            EldarXP
            last edited by

            Well i've tried both Msn 7.5 and Msn live (8.0.0812).

            My Rules are default:

            LAN
            Prot: any /source: lan net /destination address: any / destination port: any /gateway: any

            WAN
            NONE

            DMZ
            Allow out -> any destination (DNS, HTTP, HTTPS)
            Allow out -> LAN net (ICMP, IDENT)

            My network testing conf is like this:

            Internet -> routeur -> 4 interner address -> IP1 Linksys -> client 1
                                                                    -> IP2 PFsense -> client 2

            Funny enougth in this configuration it's not working and the log are showing something wrong when trying to connect via audio…
            client 1 open port udp 6016 / 6017
            client 2 open port udp client2:32912 -> ip2:23827 / client2:2036 -> ip2:23828
            all i see on the pflog are block match (rule 47/0) and sometimes for different port....

            pflogs:

            block in on wan ip1.6016 -> client 2.32912
            block in on wan ip1.6017 -> client 2.2036
            block in on wan ip1.6017 -> ip2.57520
            block in on wan ip1.6016 -> ip2.58676

            Thanks for your help
            cheers,

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

              What version pfSense are you using?? The version is important.

              The client is connected on the LAN port correct? I tested with Live Messenger 8.0.0812.00 and it properly mapped the ports.

              Also in Live Messenger goto Tools -> Options menu. When that dialog appears click Connection on the left.

              Mine says

              "You are directly connected to .NET Messenger Service.

              You are connected to the Internet through a UPnP symmetric NAT."

              If it does not say that it should enable the connection troubleshooter below. Click start and see what it finds.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • E
                EldarXP
                last edited by

                pfsense 1.01

                For Msn I'will see this tomorow no power again here -.-;

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

                  I don't understand why you have the linksys where it is?

                  PF can handle multiple WAN IP addresses and can do 1:1 NAT for you if that's what you want…  there's really no reason to use the Linksys as a router that I can think of...

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • E
                    EldarXP
                    last edited by

                    ok
                    So i have a internet connection with 2 spare public ip addresse.
                    For the test i use 2 public ip addresse one is connected to the linksys and the other one to pfsense.
                    Make the test more realistic…

                    Cheers.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • E
                      EldarXP
                      last edited by

                      msn tell me whith:
                                          pfsense that i'm connected thru a UPNP symetric NAT. (Administrator)
                                          Linksys that i'm connected thru a UPnP Port Restricted NAT. (Administrator)

                      Both are directly connected to .NET Messenger Service.

                      Cheers,

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • E
                        EldarXP
                        last edited by

                        Arg
                        I've actually tried to connect to each other while connected directly on internet and i had the same problem -.-;
                        Wondering what's wrong with my computer…

                        Thanks for your time and you great support.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • T
                          tec
                          last edited by

                          Hi,
                          does this Package work without any Problems on an Multi-Wan Setup?
                          Regards

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

                            @EldarXP:

                            Arg
                            I've actually tried to connect to each other while connected directly on internet and i had the same problem -.-;
                            Wondering what's wrong with my computer…

                            Thanks for your time and you great support.

                            I'm guessing maybe you have a software firewall installed on the PC that was behind the Linksys, something other than the XP firewall.  This would stop certain ports from working, even if the Linksys is allowing all of the mappings…

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

                              I committed version 20061123. This addresses the address in use error, which can happen if other services are using the interface assigned to miniupnpd. Full installs just reinstall the package. Embeddeds you can update via the usual instructions.

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

                                Just a note, this package is working EXCELLENT now!! No more 100% CPU problems, no address in use problems in the case of a service restart, really no problems!!

                                Thanks for all your hard work everyone involved!!

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

                                  Excellent.  This package indeed has turned out to be a first class package.

                                  We will be merging this into -BASE for future versions due to it working so well.

                                  So all you embedded users, rejoice.

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

                                    Agreed…

                                    This has come such a long way... Congratulations for making this such a first class package and helping to make pfsense even better..

                                    Riley

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

                                      Yay for putting it in -BASE!

                                      All your -BASE are belong to us?  ;D

                                      Again, it is really great that pfSense is now the only free firewall implementation to properly handle UPnP.  I have a feeling that once it goes into -BASE we might get more XBox owners looking for a good firewall system…  :)

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • P
                                        Phobia
                                        last edited by

                                        Nice looking package.  I have a question - I appologise if it has already been answered.

                                        Is this package able to handle Multi/Dual WAN setups, or does it simply route traffic through one of the two links? (is it possible to choose which?)

                                        Thanks!

                                        – Phob

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

                                          Single WAN only ATM.

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

                                            @sullrich:

                                            Single WAN only ATM.

                                            I could be wrong on this but can't they just use the external address field to specify which wan to use? This would require have a static ip or a dynamic one that rarely changes.

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