Port Triggering/UpNp

[Buster]

Quick one........I know that when port forwarding i should turn off upnp. If im using port triggering and have upnp enabled will it cause issues?

Thanks

[BIG__DOG]

Port Triggering...the router senses when a port is trying to listen...from a service you have behind the NAT..and it opens, upon demand. It's sort of a predecessor to UPnP. It's done by the router. As with port forwarding I would use one of them, not a combination of them. UPnP is automatic port forwarding.
 

[Netduma Fraser]

Good answer above, people still use UPnP with these settings but it can cause port conflicts which is why we recommend not to. 

[TimothyYoung]

turn off Upnp, port triggering as described above is predetermined port ranges to watch over "dynamically opens and closes ports for you"

port forwarding is essentially static, mostly used for remote connections for website, games, router, etc

 

Upnp is automatic port forwarding - imo very unsafe and always advised to shut of, set your own ports

 

port triggering is a tad bit more diverse in ways and safer

[Zippy]

On 2/6/2020 at 8:51 AM, TimothyYoung said:

turn off Upnp, port triggering as described above is predetermined port ranges to watch over "dynamically opens and closes ports for you"

port forwarding is essentially static, mostly used for remote connections for website, games, router, etc

 

Upnp is automatic port forwarding - imo very unsafe and always advised to shut of, set your own ports

 

port triggering is a tad bit more diverse in ways and safer

Timothy, Are you using port triggering?

Thanks!

Zippy.

[TimothyYoung]

I use both port forwarding and triggering in my network, chrome casts are a pain so i just forward ports to each individual device.

for xbox and video games i usually just set ranges for that but you can always define specific ports in forwarding

[Zippy]

On 2/9/2020 at 11:12 AM, TimothyYoung said:

I use both port forwarding and triggering in my network, chrome casts are a pain so i just forward ports to each individual device.

for xbox and video games i usually just set ranges for that but you can always define specific ports in forwarding

Thanks! Im currently using port triggering and have much better luck.  Ive been trying to understand what the time out session means. Like if the time session is set to 20mins what does that exactly mean. Is it open for 20mins then close even if data is still being sent?  That part seems very unclear to me. And I cant seem to get a answer on the good old web! 

Thanks!

Zippy.

[Netduma Fraser]

9 hours ago, Zippy said:

Thanks! Im currently using port triggering and have much better luck.  Ive been trying to understand what the time out session means. Like if the time session is set to 20mins what does that exactly mean. Is it open for 20mins then close even if data is still being sent?  That part seems very unclear to me. And I cant seem to get a answer on the good old web! 

Thanks!

Zippy.

From the Port Triggering ? icon on the router:

"The Port Triggering Timeout value controls the inactivity timer for the designated inbound port(s). The inbound port(s) will be closed when the inactivity timer expires"

[Zippy]

On 2/22/2020 at 7:07 AM, Netduma Fraser said:

From the Port Triggering ? icon on the router:

"The Port Triggering Timeout value controls the inactivity timer for the designated inbound port(s). The inbound port(s) will be closed when the inactivity timer expires"

Thank you Fraser, Just so I understand this correctly is that once there is no activity detected on a specific port the timer starts to count down? And once it meets the said time it closes it?

It doesn't close it if there is still activity on the port regardless of time correct?

On a positive note I can confirm that I am making connections because my logs even state this. Something UPNP doesn't. And the connections that are being made through port triggering are lining up to what wireshark is also showing. The first time anything with this router makes sense of. And just to clarify my in game performance is much better. This is something I have been testing with for weeks now. Not a one night stand type deal. Even if one has an Open Nat using UPNP id question if it is truly Open. Because id almost bet the inbound traffic is being either filtered or blocked by the firewall. This also will very likely cause mixed results when some one tries to prioritize ports for a specific game in your traffic prioritization section in QoS.. Specially UDP ports.. You cant have time sensitive ports being filtered or blocked.. This is something that has been talked about on SNB. But they did not come up with a solution.. 

At the end of the day Fraser it would be nice to at least see what the firewall is filtering or blocking.. A visual at least.. Most routers do tend to struggle with identifying gaming traffic on the inbound connection.. What I have described above you may want to at least forward this to your team to have a look at.. Because im sure there are likely others that are struggling with this very same issue..

Thanks!

Zippy.

[Netduma Fraser]

Yes exactly. That would be a good addition, could be more confusing for users though. I will pass it on to the team, if you've noticed a difference then it is something worth exploring.

[Zippy]

1 hour ago, Netduma Fraser said:

Yes exactly. That would be a good addition, could be more confusing for users though. I will pass it on to the team, if you've noticed a difference then it is something worth exploring.

Thanks Fraser! I do think it would be a good edition. And I totally understand that it could become confusing for some users. So it would be something that could be more hide per say.. Not easily accessible.. Some thing in the back ground that could be accessed. I get this router is suppose to be very user friendly.. And easy to use for users that are not into anything to techy. But it would help with trouble shooting or just good basic knowledge to eliminate something from the equation when trouble shooting..

My testing has been on going and my results are promising. And it has given very good results for a long period of time now. I do believe im still getting some filtering issues but the main issue with that is because with this type of port triggering one can only trigger one port and not a range of ports in one rule. And the issue about creating another rule is because the inbound range there would be considered over lapping.. So it would be awesome if we could use a range for the triggered ports just like the inbound currently gives us.. This is something other routers do allow. I do feel very confident about my findings thus far. And maybe it would be worth letting the devs know about my issue if you would please.. 

Another interesting thing I have also stumbled on was the issue causing the Device Manager to get screwed up. Where some devices get stuck in offline and online status.. Im currently now have gone a month without that issue.. Devices are now going offline when they should and coming back online when they should without issue thus far. Still testing this as well but results are very promising..

Zippy.

[Netduma Fraser]

Once this 3.0 upgrade goes out I'm confident it'll pave the way for more features that people would like to become available. What is the method you've found regarding the offline devices not appearing?

[Zippy]

2 minutes ago, Netduma Fraser said:

Once this 3.0 upgrade goes out I'm confident it'll pave the way for more features that people would like to become available. What is the method you've found regarding the offline devices not appearing?

That's good to hear Fraser! I do look forward to 3.0.  My issue with devices was that some would appear offline while online and some would say online while are actually offline.. Things seemed to get stuck.. So what I did was put everything on wifi and took all hardwired ports out of the equation. Once I did that boom! Works like a charm! Well at least its been working for a bit over a month now. Before I was lucky if it lasted a few days.. So basically what I did was hard reset the router and setup everything on wifi.. What I have not tested yet is by putting everything wired and no wifi.. I used wifi first because it was the easiest way to get everything connected..  Also ive notice by doing this the Device Manager responds very quickly when devices go offline and online. I have tested this with reserving ips for devices and not reserving ips for devices. Both give good results and Device Manager responds properly. This is something I have been testing for month and feel confident there must be some issue with wired and wireless devices when combined.. Again I haven't tested hooking things up wired only to see what happens. So that is something I may try next when I have some more time.. Hope this helps! This might be something you might want to pass onto the devs about also.. I cant say for sure if this would help others atm. Been holding back saying anything about it until I felt a bit more confident.. But again things are looking very promising!

If you have anything to add or ask feel free to do so!

Thanks Fraser!

Zippy.