Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'nat'.

The search index is currently processing. Current results may not be complete.
  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Resilio Sync
    • Sync General Discussion
    • Sync Troubleshooting
    • Sync for NAS (Network Attached Storage)
    • Sync Stories
    • Developers
    • Feature Requests

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 2 results

  1. Product Resilio Sync Pro 2.6.3 (1340) Pro - as in 5 user license/subscription. Platform(s) : Ubuntu 19.10, Ubuntu 18.04, FreeNAS 11.2 (but also a Win10 laptop at work - happy to leave this out of the equation). Okay - I've done various searches but unable to find more specific information I'm looking for. Everything was working "tickety-boo" in 2018, till my employer started blocking a "vast" range of anything to anywhere TCP/UDP ports... I'm on good terms with one of the Network administrators, and he gave me a list of TCP ports open to "anywhere", e.g. armed with this information I can now ssh to my Raspberry Pi from my desk at work, with a NAT rule on my router. Currently I've implemented a "kludge" - I keep my main home computer (Dell Laptop running 19.10) connected/sync'd via my employer's VPN (horrible Checkpoint SSL product), and I've got "Predefined Hosts" pointing to the IP address of my work Laptop running 19.10, using port 60870. This works. Another even "kludgier" workaround I was using was to insert a 256 GB thumb drive into a BananaPi (M1, running Armbian), running on a LiPo battery, sync everything to there from "home", plonk it on my desk (got a dumb Gbit switch on my desk) and get it sync'd, but the Pi ethernet NIC is a bit "dodgy", had to keep rebooting it (pulling power and pressing power button) - i.e. take it into work, and home again, everyday... So - given this information : Work will let me SOURCE DESTINATION TCP PORT office anywhere 30400 office anywhere 31400 office anywhere 32400 office anywhere 4020 office anywhere 4022 office anywhere 4023 office anywhere 5671 office anywhere 5672 i.e. no UDP it seems, and not "ranges of ports" unless e.g. 5671-5672... Also - I'm using one of these for my SSH NAT rule to my RPi. Here's my "Predefined Hosts" settings for one of my shares, from the Ubuntu machine @home that I keep VPN'd to the office : "tenrji-wk" is an /etc/hosts file entry, pointing to the DCHP leased IP address of my work Ubuntu laptop... I have to edit /etc/hosts if my work computer gets a new DHCP lease. Armed with this information, could I perhaps : Setup (at least one) of my work Resilio Clients to send out on TCP port 30400 to my NoIP dynamic hostname, with my broadband router having a NAT rule to send this traffic to some "port" (e.g. 60870) on one of my home computers. e.g. : SOURCE TCP-Port -> DESTINATION:PORT -> NAT-DEST:NAT-Port desktop 30400 -> myhost.dynds.com:30400 -> home-PC:60870
  2. Hallo, as I haven't found an answer to this question I'll just try it here. My assumption is that the "Sync with..." status of peers is chaining such that peers appear as synced (and online) even though this information is only available through one of the peers. Can somebody confirm that? Let me explain my setup. I am using BitTorrent Sync without tracker and relay server. Those are disabled for every folder on every machine and instead predefined hosts are used to talk to the other peers. I am using two 24/7 linux servers behind a NAT-router without upnp where only one of the servers has the BitTorrent Sync port forwarded through the router firewall. Currently me and my MacBook are in a totally different city. I resolve the mentioned NAT router through DynDns and only added the forwarded port to the predefined host list of the MacBook client. Interestingly I can see 2 relays synced (and online) even though my MacBook should only be able to talk with 1. I'd love to see this chaining feature confirmed. Or is there something I am missing? -- ankoh