Opened 4 years ago

Closed 4 years ago

#1978 closed defect (no response)

Wrong UPNP selection

Reported by: 2121 Owned by: zzz
Priority: major Milestone: undecided
Component: router/transport Version: 0.9.29
Keywords: Wrong UPNP selection Cc:
Parent Tickets: Sensitive: no


When a UPNP Device has a differnet IP than the internet connection, port forwarding is activated on the wrong device.
UPNP and SSU should be compared in order to avoid bogus UPNP detection leading to false 'Network OK' state.
In this case it should actually be 'firewalled'.
In a scenario where the UPNP device is configured on IP but the actual internet connection is on IP ( in this case does not provide UPNP).
Please fix this as some cable routers suffer from this false detection leading to starved participating tunnels.


Change History (4)

comment:1 Changed 4 years ago by zzz

Status: newinfoneeded_new

Are you saying that:

1) you have two UPnP devices, one on and one on, and we are taking the IP from the "wrong" one?


2) you have one UPnP device, it's reporting the IP address as, but it's actually

In either case, how do you propose that we "fix this"? We do provide options on /confignet in the console, see the "IP Configuration" section, where "Disable UPnP address detection" is a choice. Does that work for you?

comment:2 Changed 4 years ago by 2121

Status: infoneeded_newnew

it's 2) but with a dynamic ip that would not be possible.
I opened this ticket because when carrier grade nat is in place this happens - but the actual problem is that the i2prouter has a status of "Network OK" - and that is obviously not the case.
I brought this issue up because a lot of i2prouters facing this scenario are polluting the netdb.

comment:3 Changed 4 years ago by zzz

Status: newinfoneeded_new
  • What would not be possible? It can't report the correct IP, or it can't report the wrong IP, or what? The IP was originally correct but then it changed? Help me out with some more details. I'm struggling to understand what's going on.
  • You have any data showing that 'a lot' of routers are 'polluting the netdb'? Please share.

comment:4 Changed 4 years ago by zzz

Resolution: no response
Status: infoneeded_newclosed
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.