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

    Miniupnpd issues with lastest snapshot

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved 2.1 Snapshot Feedback and Problems - RETIRED
    70 Posts 22 Posters 32.8k 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.
    • jimpJ
      jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
      last edited by

      Can someone else on i386 try this:

      killall -9 miniupnpd
      fetch -o /usr/local/sbin/miniupnpd http://files.chi.pfsense.org/jimp/miniupnpd-i386
      chmod 555 /usr/local/sbin/miniupnpd
      

      And then restart the miniupnpd service in the GUI, and see if it works.

      That binary now works on my Alix.

      Remember: Upvote with the šŸ‘ button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

      Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

      Do not Chat/PM for help!

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • C
        catfish99
        last edited by

        I am usingĀ  pfSense 2.1-BETA0-pfSense (i386) on a Soekris 6501.

        I tried the miniupnpd file replacement you mentioned. Activated miniupnpd, and then ran Skype and Transmission. Neither got added - ie. still doesn't work as it should.

        However, miniupnpd keeps running - which is a good thing.

        Below are the entries from my syslog file…

        
        Aug 6 09:46:27	miniupnpd[12563]: Failed to remove NAT-PMP mapping eport 61079, protocol TCP
        Aug 6 09:46:27	miniupnpd[12563]: Failed to remove NAT-PMP mapping eport 61079, protocol TCP
        Aug 6 09:46:20	miniupnpd[12563]: Listening for NAT-PMP traffic on port 5351
        Aug 6 09:46:20	miniupnpd[12563]: Listening for NAT-PMP traffic on port 5351
        Aug 6 09:46:20	miniupnpd[12563]: HTTP listening on port 2189
        Aug 6 09:46:20	miniupnpd[12563]: HTTP listening on port 2189
        
        
        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • jimpJ
          jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
          last edited by

          Any way to try that with UPnP rather than NAT-PMP?

          Remember: Upvote with the šŸ‘ button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

          Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

          Do not Chat/PM for help!

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • C
            catfish99
            last edited by

            JMP, turned off NAT-PMP and tried again.

            Tried Skype & Transmission and neither was able to create an entry (as they should if it worked ok).

            In summary - Still doesn't work as it should, but application is able to run without error.

            Log entries & configuration below:

            UPnP & NAT-PMP Settings

            • Enable UPnP & NAT-PMP - Enabled
            • Allow UPnP Port Mapping - Enabled
            • Allow NAT-PMP Port Mapping - DISABLED
            • Interfaces (generally LAN) - LAN
            Aug 6 10:07:40	miniupnpd[53693]: HTTP listening on port 2189
            Aug 6 10:07:40	miniupnpd[53693]: HTTP listening on port 2189
            Aug 6 10:07:40	php[57805]: /pkg_edit.php: miniupnpd: Restarting service on interface: lan
            
            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • C
              Cino
              last edited by

              @jimp:

              Can someone else on i386 try this:

              killall -9 miniupnpd
              fetch -o /usr/local/sbin/miniupnpd http://files.chi.pfsense.org/jimp/miniupnpd-i386
              chmod 555 /usr/local/sbin/miniupnpd
              

              And then restart the miniupnpd service in the GUI, and see if it works.

              That binary now works on my Alix.

              So far so good!!! I did testing from my windows server running uTorrent… Enabling UPnP and NAT-PMP, each by itself within utorrent and in pfSense.

              utorrent UPnP:
              52225 keep state tcp 192.168.0.100 uTorrent (TCP)
              52225 keep state udp 192.168.0.100 uTorrent (UDP)

              utorrent NAT-PMP:
              52225 keep state tcp 192.168.0.100 NAT-PMP 52225 tcp
              52225 keep state udp 192.168.0.100 NAT-PMP 52225 udp

              uTorrent was able to tear-down the session when the option was disabled

              I'll do more testing this week: deny ports and default traffic queue... but Thank you Jim! And thanks again for sticking thru this!

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • C
                catfish99
                last edited by

                seeing the last post, I fetched the binary again and re-ran my testing.

                Well, I am glad to report UPnP & NAT-PMP are both working.

                Thanks!

                pfsense-1.jpg
                pfsense-1.jpg_thumb
                pfsense-2.jpg
                pfsense-2.jpg_thumb

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • S
                  strumf666
                  last edited by

                  Thank you very much :)

                  edit: A question, after testing with uTorrent and skype, the ports for skype remain open even after I closed the program, but the uTorrent ports get closed. Why is that?

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • AhnHELA
                    AhnHEL
                    last edited by

                    I have been watching this thread intensely waiting for this issue to be resolved before trying out 2.1.Ā  Finally upgraded and it went smoothly and miniupnpd is working as well, many thanks to you Jimp.

                    AhnHEL (Angel)

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • johnpozJ
                      johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
                      last edited by

                      Just updated
                      2.1-BETA0 (i386)
                      built on Tue Aug 7 04:03:30 EDT 2012
                      FreeBSD 8.3-RELEASE-p4

                      And working great, started right up.Ā  Test with just win7 upnp interface of device, sees pfsense as freebsd router due to discovery.Ā  Allowed me to create forward to .209 address, but got denied when tried to a different address.Ā  Which is per my settings.Ā  So that is working as well

                      allow 1024-65535 192.168.1.209/32 1024-65535

                      Side question, is there anyway to secure upnp other than allow disallow rules?Ā  How can there not be a signature, key, password portion to the protocol - that says hey without this key you can not do anything.Ā  Something like the rndc key with bind.

                      An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                      If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                      Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                      SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • jimpJ
                        jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
                        last edited by

                        That's a question worthy of its own thread - I'm not aware of anything there, it's just how the protocol was designed, but someone else may know.

                        Remember: Upvote with the šŸ‘ button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

                        Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

                        Do not Chat/PM for help!

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • C
                          Cino
                          last edited by

                          @johnpoz:

                          Side question, is there anyway to secure upnp other than allow disallow rules?Ā  How can there not be a signature, key, password portion to the protocol - that says hey without this key you can not do anything.Ā  Something like the rndc key with bind.

                          I've never heard of anything like that either… poke around here http://miniupnp.free.fr/

                          @strumf666:

                          edit: A question, after testing with uTorrent and skype, the ports for skype remain open even after I closed the program, but the uTorrent ports get closed. Why is that?

                          I want to say that is Skypes fault… The client tell miniupnpd the ports aren't needed anymore. I noticed it with UTorrent when using NAT-PMP... If I exit out the program, the ports down close, but if uncheck the option to use NAT-PMP; uTorrent tells miniupnp to tear down the session.

                          Only way to tell is to run a packet capture and see what is being sent/receive.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • jimpJ
                            jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
                            last edited by

                            Yes it's up to the client to inform the server to close the ports, unless you clear them manually. I don't recall if miniupnpd will reap them after a while or if it leaves them indefinitely.

                            Remember: Upvote with the šŸ‘ button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

                            Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

                            Do not Chat/PM for help!

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • S
                              strumf666
                              last edited by

                              OK, thanks for explaining.

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

                                UPnP is a dumb protocol, there's no authentication because Microsoft designed it.Ā  :P

                                The access controls built in to miniupnp are actually above and beyond the spec, amazingly.

                                I'm just happy we have it, Xboxes (and to a lesser extent, PS3 and some PC games) are much happier having it in place!

                                I can't remember if miniupnp reaps old ports, but it would be nice to have that option.Ā  Most devices automatically re-add them every time they power up anyway.Ā  Alternatively, a "selective reap" option to kill just one entry would be handy too.Ā  I'm not sure if this would be something that pfSense devs would need to add, or if it would have to be an underlying feature in miniupnpd (at which point I should submit the request to that developer rather than redmine).

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

                                  @bradenmcg:

                                  I can't remember if miniupnp reaps old ports, but it would be nice to have that option.

                                  At least this shows in my logs:

                                  
                                  Aug 7 22:13:03	miniupnpd[6959]: remove port mapping 4504 UDP because it has expired
                                  Aug 7 22:13:03	miniupnpd[6959]: remove port mapping 4504 UDP because it has expired
                                  Aug 7 22:13:03	miniupnpd[6959]: remove port mapping 5354 UDP because it has expired
                                  Aug 7 22:13:03	miniupnpd[6959]: remove port mapping 5354 UDP because it has expired
                                  Aug 8 03:06:15	miniupnpd[6959]: remove port mapping 9635 TCP because it has expired
                                  Aug 8 03:06:15	miniupnpd[6959]: remove port mapping 9635 TCP because it has expired
                                  
                                  
                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • T
                                    tfbiii
                                    last edited by

                                    "there is no authentication because M$ designed it" - what an idiotic statement

                                    Anyway - to the admins/devs, thank you! This seems to be working much better now and makes my life a lot easier.

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