Sky User - The unofficial support forum for everything Sky!

mossywell · #21 28-03-07, 07:56 AM

I am exasperated! Let me explain with an analogy: Two people attempt the same crossword and one finishes it and the other doesn't. The one that doesn't finish it then posts on a forum that not only is the crossword completely impossible (their proof being that they failed to complete it), but that the newspaper it was found in is therefore rubbish as well.

Similarly with port forwarding on the Sky router. Taking each point in turn...
1. The firmware is not crippled for port forwarding. It works - no ifs or buts. It works. Indeed, it uses iptables and therefore works extremely well.
2. This may be true - have you tried resetting the router to factory default or indeed reinstalling the Sky firmware?
3. Sky did indeed write a buggy change to upnp. However, this does not cause problems with port forwarding. (It can cause wireless issues, though I have never run into them myself and I use wireless.)
4. Well, that's very subjective. There's a splodge on the carpet in my house but my house isn't crap. You get the picture.

Oh, by the way, in case I forgot to say: port forwarding does work on the router.

If you are having problems, I suggest:
1. Starting from scratch with a default router. It's easy to get tied in knots.
2. Do not create outbound rules - only inbound. Ever. You don't need them.
3. If one public port scanning tool says it's not working try another. You never know - it may be working after all!
4. EDIT: (forgot to mention): Make sure that the port your forwarding to is up and running on the IP address your forwarding to.

HTH
m

tcrooks · #22 28-03-07, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mossywell

If you are having problems, I suggest:
1. Starting from scratch with a default router. It's easy to get tied in knots.
2. Do not create outbound rules - only inbound. Ever. You don't need them.
3. If one public port scanning tool says it's not working try another. You never know - it may be working after all!
4. EDIT: (forgot to mention): Make sure that the port your forwarding to is up and running on the IP address your forwarding to.

m

I always appreciate a constructive comment

. And just in case I didn't mention it before I'm not alone in being frustrated by port forwarding on Netgear routers.

Of course I can easily get hosting working by just swapping back to the Linksys router that I have got and have done so and it works, although I'd prefer to stay within Sky's T&Cs using the router supplied.

And as you say trying more than one port scanning tool makes sense and I did by using Symantec's - with the same result (although I'm not quite sure what differences might arise between different tools).

I do not have any outbound rules. And, amazingly, I can reach the site I'd like to host quite easily on my LAN at 192.168.0.n. When I try to access the site externally I get this displayed;

I believe this to show that port 80 wasn't open, so the rule didn't work?

And I've reset the router to the condition it arrived in - flawed?

So for all us confused wannabee Sky router users is there someone who can set out clearly what they have done to successfully port forward a port including what other settings they might have, like WAN Setup, Dynamic DNS and uPnP, just so I can try your solution to the problem and go away happy and content with the router that Sky and some users so clearly love?

isu · #23 28-03-07, 10:15 AM

I'm right behind you on this one tcrooks! I too am having exactly the same issue with my router. I am able to add "services" and "firewall rules" to my hearts content - but these services/rules never seem to be enabled. It appears that there is some over-riding rule - whether that be at firmware level - who knows?!?

Quote:

Originally Posted by tcrooks

And I've reset the router to the condition it arrived in - flawed?

Did you do this via "Revert to Factory Default Settings"? And if so - did you have to make any changes to connected again?

Also, does anybody know how to determine what firmware version my router is running off?

the_sky_goat · #24 28-03-07, 12:09 PM

Hi There tcrooks - can you upload a screenshot of your router firewall rules please? They should look a little like this although your internal IP is probably different
:

I have a server running quite happily via my Sky Router as you can see. I do not use DynDNS, although I would be happy to look at your settings. I also have uPnP turned off. In WAN setup you should have no ticks in any of the three boxes.

the_sky_goat · #25 28-03-07, 12:17 PM

I should also add that you cannot use your domain name to view your server from within your internal network - i.e. If you have a server set up on 192.168.0.5 and you are on 192.168.0.2 then you will not be able to access that server from www.yourdomain.com as the domain name resolves to your routers WAN IP address which in turn is interpreted by your browser as being the address to access you router.

The only way around this that I am aware of is to create an entry in your HOSTS file which points your domain to the internal address.

isu · #26 28-03-07, 12:28 PM

I have HTTP forwarded to 192.168.0.2 (my windows 2003 server) but still no joy. I have tried this with uPNP enabled and disabled.

Any help would be gratefully received!

mossywell · #27 28-03-07, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tcrooks

And just in case I didn't mention it before I'm not alone in being frustrated by port forwarding on Netgear routers.

I agree - they can be frustrating. However, the port fowarding "stuff" is actually not Sky-specific; it's ported straight from the Netgear firmware. Also, the point I really want to emphasise is that whilst lots of people have the same problem, that in itself doesn't imply a firmware bug.

Nevertheless, if you agree, I will PM you a click by click guide to setting up port forwarding to an internal web server starting with a router that's been reset to default. One of two things will happen:
1. We'll work out where all these people are going wrong.
2. We'll prove that I'm wrong and that there is a bug in the firmware. (I really am happy for this to happen because I can then publish a workaround - I'd rather be wrong and find a solution!)

One caveat: it will involve typing commands on the assumption that you're using Windows. If you are not, I hope you'll be able to translate them to OSX / Linux / BeOS / VMS or whatever.