Can't forward port 8082 to Kodi Web Server

[#1]

Hi All,

Pleaase could a PlusNet member of staff or tech-savvy forum member please confirm if we're able to port forward port 8082 on the Sagemcom 2704n router? My PlusNet Firewall in Member Centre is set to "high".  I have successfully forwarded other ports (higher and lower ranges) for use with other devices without issue.  I have a dynamic DNS account set up. which works flawlessly with other devices/ports, just not 8082 when attempting to connect in from an outside source (internally it works ok - but that's not what I need working).

In Kodi, I've set a Web Server on port 8082, I've forwarded the port on the router to the Kodi Box (the box has a static IP) and I've also ensured to create a static entry within the DHCP table for the MAC of the Kodi box in the router advanced settings.  I've also tried a NAT trigger rule, but I simply cannot access port 8082 externally.

Can someone please advise if this is a limitation of the router, the PlusNet Firewall, or both?

I know it's not the Kodi Box or the network, because tests I've run prove this.

regards

Mal.

[#2]

I thought the Plusnet firewall in the member centre set to High was supposed to block incoming connections to all ports.

Why not use a different port number, if you can forward other port numbers successfully?

[#3]

Hi,

Thanks for the quick response. It doesn't block all ports as I have successfully port forwarded to 808, 34556 etc. I've had this issue with simple SMTP protocols too for automated CCTV email alerts. This was true even when set to low. I was just wondering if someone could point out with a fair degree of certainty that this is either a limitation of the router or if Plusnet has locked down specific ports.

All the best

Mal

[#4]

Well, I logged a support call via chat and was informed "We do not support port forwarding".  I advised I don't need help with port forwarding, because I've already set up the necessary rules on the router; I just wanted confirmation from their firewall team if they do/do not block certain ports, and is 8082 amongst them.

I have since tried disabling the plusnet firewall completely, my windows firewall completely, and re-run a test from www.canyouseeme.org and it confirms the port is shut.  To me, this proves unreservedly that the issue lies either with the router itself, or PlusNet are blocking that port.  Seeing as how they won't help me confirm if the port is open/closed, I asked about a new router, and was informed the only new device they have is for VSDL aka fibre.  No model numbers/type were specified so I don't know if I already have it, or if its newer.  It seems that no matter what you try to do, they try to make it as difficult as possible for you to come to a swift and reasonable conclusion.  It's not like I'm asking them to fix it for me, to set up all the rules etc.  I've done that.  I just want a simple "yes it's open" or "no it's closed for xxxx reason" so I can pinpoint the root cause.

So frustrating!!

Mal.

[#5]

As a last ditch resort I put my PC in the DMZ, disabled all firewalls locally, on router and on plusnets side, opened all ports (TCP) 800-25000 and even removed some exisitng port forward rules (thinking there might be a limit on the number of allowed rules that is causing the isse) and painstakingly went through the motions on www.canyouseeme.org to see if any of the ports were open.  Nope.  Nada.  Nothing.  This is ridiculous - why block so many ports plusnet? We understand security vs usability but this is just daft.  Give us back control of what ports WE want open, not what you think we should need.  Can a PlusNet member of staff please chip in here? Calls to your support centre and online chat fall upon deaf ears and are swiftly swept under the carpet without a care in the world, while us customers are left with inoperable devices/services because of your port blocking.

[#6]

The packets from canyouseeme.org to port 8082 arrived at our router, which is our own old Netgear not any Plusnet issued router.

Did you disconnect the PPP session after changing the Plusnet firewall setting in the member centre?

If there was no program listening on any of the ports you tested on your computer in the DMZ, then I expect they would show as closed on a port checker.

Why not simply pick a different port number instead of 8082?

[#7]

I'm with @ejs on this one. I'm thinking that your Kodi server is maybe only listening on localhost, can you confirm that you can connect to it from another device and post the local URL you used to do this please.

[#8]

Hi there,

Thanks for the prompt response.

I can confirm I did a full router/dock reset (off for 5 mins then back on) after changing the firewall setting in the member centre of "off".  I then retried all my tests and port 8082 (and the others mentioned) were still closed.  I have tried many different ports as you suggest however they're still blocked according to www.canyouseeme.org. 

I just performed another test to prove if it's perhaps a time-related issue with the router itself; because over time the port blocking has gotten worse.  I never had these issues about a year ago, and nothing has changed since (apart from this one 8082 port test) so maybe this is a firmware issue?

One port forward rule that has always worked for years is my CCTV media port on 34567.  This has always shown open on www.canyouseeme.org. I have since removed that rule and re-added it exactly as it was (along with rebooting the CCTV DVR and ensuring it has an IP)....and lo and behold, that port is now closed.  I'm leaning towards this being a router issue and perhaps I need to order a new one?

Just out of curiosity, because I read this on one of the cumminity forum posts, but does the Sagecomm 2704n router have issues port forwarding to "unknown" devices? I have several of those on my network; and the Kodi Web Server is on one of them - but there's no way to change the default name.  On that basis, I gave the unknowns a static DHCP entry within the advanced settings of the router by MAC address, as that was one recommendation, again announced on the community forums.

Regards

Mal.

[#9]

Hi,

In response to your query, I can access the Web Server from machines on my local network i.e. 192.168.1.x:8082 but when attempting to access externally from my DyDNS address i.e. xxxxx.ddns.net:8082 it's not working, because the port is closed.

Regards

Mal.

[#10]

OK @Malachor, use a site like this: http://www.whatsmyip.org/ to get your current IP.

Then try accessing the server using the IP it reports http://123.456.789.0:8082 do you get anything different?

[#11]

It's probably the issue with port forwarding to devices named as Unknown not working or not working reliably. I'm not sure if any workarounds with static IP addresses actually work.

I think the Plusnet Hub One (a re-branded BT HomeHub 5A) does not suffer from the same problem. It would probably be cheaper to buy something else yourself if Plusnet won't give you one for "free", or buy one off ebay.

[#12]

Hi,

I have changed the web server port to 8085 and can confirm I can access it from my external facing ip x.x.x.x:8085 as I'm being prompted for a username/password.  The port is now also showing as open on www.canyouseeme.org, whereas earlier, it wasn't (I tested 8080-200 manually one by one).  This is good news as it means its now just a DNS issue, which i'm sure in time will correct itself at the next global enforcement interval.  Can I ask what has changed your end to allow this?

Regards

Mal.

[#13]

Update: DyDNS access confirmed! That was quick.  I can now access from xxxxddns.net:8085.  Issue seems resolved for now.  I'm very keen to know how this was resolved so that further port openings can happen without a hitch, and also so that other community members can benefit from this.

Regards

Mal.

[#14]

canyouseeme.org will have tried the correct IP address because it detects your IP address when you go to its website. So there won't be any dynamic DNS issues with that tester.

I still suspect you'll find that port forwarding with Unknown named devices doesn't work reliably.

[#15]

Well @Malachor the obvious thing now is to revert back to your original port to see it that works as it would appear to be a DDNS issue after all.