View Full Version : Re: DGL 4590

James Egan
04-29-08, 09:27 PM
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 16:01:01 -0700, Random
<Random@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>Has anybody been able to loop back? Meaning go out of your router and come
>back in with your WAN IP:port to get to your IPCAM to see if it works from
>the WAN side? I can easily see the IPCAM with LAN side IP but not WANIP:port.
>Port forwarding is set up properly

Assuming your router is capable of doing what you are attempting, you
need to consider how the ipcam can reply to connections from your lan

If the IPCAM and PC are on the same lan subnet, the router's initial
address translation and forwarding will work okay but replies will go
directly from the IPCAM to PC bypassing the router which can't then do
the required reverse translation.


James Egan
05-01-08, 03:05 AM
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:31:00 -0700, Random
<Random@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>The IPCAM is my PC is .200. I can get to the IPCAM using
> from my PC.
>I bought this 'more expensive' router mainly because I need the ability to
>readily assign an IP adrress to a MAC address. (Not just have the MAC address
>be able to get an IP from the pool I assigned as available. Needed for port
>But I remember with less expensive routers I've worked with I was able to
>enter my current WAN IP and port number and make it to the IPCAM. Without
>that capability I can't confirm that I can get to the IPCAM from the WAN.
>Everybody would have this same problem. This seems like such a basic required
>capability. How can anyone set up LAN side servers and confirm connectivity
>from the WAN? I can't imagine that we are expected to go to some other AP to
>see if connectivity works! I have to be missing something here!!!

It's not impossible. It's just harder than it appears initially.

This link explains the problems and proposed solutions when using a
BSD box as a router. Although you are using a dedicated router, the
problems will be the same and the solutions or workarounds required
will be similar.