 FROSTYPremium,MVM
join:2000-08-10
Leeds, AL
 ·Windstream
| reply to Bill_MI
Re: BEFSR11 port triggering and FW 1.39 and 1.40.1. Yeah, I noticed you got fed up with the latest f/w offerings and went back to 1.30. 
Tonight, I'll try to verify the ICQ/MSGZ ability I mentioned above.
I wished the Linksys Techs would provide the proper details as to the functionality and limitations of the port triggering for those, such as I, that have requested it in the past. |
|
 Bill_MIBill In MichiganPremium,MVM
join:2001-01-03
Royal Oak, MI
kudos:1
 ·Comcast
·WOW Internet and..
| said by FR0STY:
I wished the Linksys Techs would provide the proper details as to the functionality and limitations of the port triggering for those, such as I, that have requested it in the past.
Yeah... I don't think LinkSys engineering knows, either, is the problem. We're on our own.
If you'd like to compare notes, I characterized it briefly, here: INFO: Port Triggering - What is it?
One nice thing is SPI doesn't affect Port Triggering while it does static forwarding and DMZ - another "undocumented feature". |
|
FROSTYPremium,MVM
join:2000-08-10
Leeds, AL Reviews:
·Windstream
| Thanks for the link.
Very useful info.
Yeah, it's a total bummer 2 PCs can't use the same trigger port(s) and incoming port(s) at the same time. I think a feature called 'NAT trigger tags' is required for multiple LAN PC's to use the same inbound ports simultaneously behind a NAT box.
I'll get a friend to send me a file via ICQ, then I'll try to play a game on the Zone. This should work like it has in the past. Irregardless of the outcome, I'll add to your port triggering thread.
Thanks Bill
[text was edited by author 2001-10-08 14:03:26] |
|
Bill_MIBill In MichiganPremium,MVM
join:2001-01-03
Royal Oak, MI
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and..
| Since you found the key, Frosty, that IRC-DCC thing I tried *should* have worked. You convinced me I probably goofed trying it.
EDIT: And great addition to the other thread! Please add all you find.
[text was edited by author 2001-10-09 00:41:02] |
|
Bill_MIBill In MichiganPremium,MVM
join:2001-01-03
Royal Oak, MI
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and..
| reply to FROSTY
said by FR0STY:
I think a feature called 'NAT trigger tags' is required for multiple LAN PC's to use the same inbound ports simultaneously behind a NAT box.
I think you're on top of what I was originally looking for - where the outbound trigger's IP destination allows that IP (and only that IP) to forward back. This way, only attempting the same server would conflict. |
|
FROSTYPremium,MVM
join:2000-08-10
Leeds, AL Reviews:
·Windstream
| reply to Bill_MI
Cool. Thanks.
I know what you mean.
I remember reading about a so-called trigger tag feature. The code apparently makes a table of LAN IPs, MAC addys, and the common inbound ports. Somehow it 'tags' the outbound packet, so the return packet can be sent to the proper LAN PC.
[text was edited by author 2001-10-09 01:14:33] |
|
|
|
