Either your provider uses CGNAT or you're doing something wrong. The former can be confirmed by checking if the WAN address in your router is in the 100.64.0.0/10 block.
Either your provider uses CGNAT or you're doing something wrong. The former can be confirmed by checking if the WAN address in your router is in the 100.64.0.0/10 block.
"I just remembered something that happened a long time ago."
Unusual choice - using an RFC1918 range may collide with customers' subnets as well as their own internal systems - but CGNAT it is. Unless you can request and/or pay for a public IPv4, forget about being connectable...
"I just remembered something that happened a long time ago."
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I am using a TPLink router, should I use Virtual Servers or Port Triggering?
it's hip to be square
- Virtual servers: permanently forward incoming connections on ports a..b to ports c..d on a LAN host. The ranges can differ, but their size must match. (This is the one you want.)
- Port triggering: when a LAN host makes outgoing connections to ports a..b, dynamically forward incoming connections on ports c..d to it.
In both instances a=b and c=d is allowed, and there can't be any overlap between rules.
One day we'll all have IPv6 and this won't be necessary anymore... but it won't be today.
"I just remembered something that happened a long time ago."
Bookmarks