Menu
What's new
By:
Filters Better Search

Search results

  • SNBForums Code of Conduct

    SNBForums is a community for everyone, no matter what their level of experience.

    Please be tolerant and patient of others, especially newcomers. We are all here to share and learn!

    The rules are simple: Be patient, be nice, be helpful or be gone!

  1. D

    380.57 Possible port forwarding issue

    Thanks for all your replies. I have used 380.59 since the past week or so. The connections are slower (doing website speed tests), but it works at least. I will rebuild my network soon and not use the router for the server anymore, and then it won't matter, becuase I will use the router for my...
  2. D

    380.57 Possible port forwarding issue

    Yes, Linux firewall is simple. I have no DDNS, and no custom script or similar. So question remains, why do 378_56_2 work flawlessly and version after that not... Anyone else with the same or similar experience?
  3. D

    380.57 Possible port forwarding issue

    Like I wrote earlier, sometimes I can connect to the sit(s) (on my public server) and sometimes not due to timeout, now I can connect more often than before - that's why it's "better but not perfect". You can check for yourself: https://www.techandme.se You told me earlier that it was a...
  4. D

    380.57 Possible port forwarding issue

    Any update here? Just tested with the latest firmware (380.59), and it's better, but not perfect as it was before.
  5. D

    380.57 Possible port forwarding issue

    Yes. I'm sure. It's superfast normally.
  6. D

    380.57 Possible port forwarding issue

    Is it possible to report upstream? And that is /if/ *that* is the issue here. Likely, but I'm not convinced.
  7. D

    380.57 Possible port forwarding issue

    I totally agree, and understand. I really hope someone nails it so that the issue is fixed.
  8. D

    380.57 Possible port forwarding issue

    As I stated earlier - I think the router can't handle the bandwidth without the NAT Acceleration in my case, and with NAT Acceleration it fails due to the original issue with the new FW. I don't know if you have that saying, but in Sweden we call it "Moment 22 - Catch 22". :) Anyhow, the issue...
  9. D

    Merlin + entware + owncloud + lighttpd with https (solved)

    You should visit https://www.techandme.se if you want some ownCloud guides, and tips and tricks. :)
  10. D

    380.57 Possible port forwarding issue

    I tested with 3 - 80, 443, and 22. But I use 6 forwards with the old FW.
  11. D

    Merlin + entware + owncloud + lighttpd with https (solved)

    You could just use the Snakeoil certs if you are on Ubuntu. EDIT: Oh, you're on LightHTTPD.
  12. D

    Time to first byte increased with 380_57

    Ok, so my answer is here: http://www.snbforums.com/threads/380-57-possible-port-forwarding-issue.29797/page-2#post-237927 and here http://www.snbforums.com/threads/380-57-possible-port-forwarding-issue.29797/page-2#post-237967
  13. D

    380.57 Possible port forwarding issue

    Ok, so after some more investigation I decided to revert back to 378.56_2, the old FW. Reasons why is that when I left it on for like 2 hours I got the same effect as with the new FW. The reason for the same effect is (what I think) that the CPU can't handle the traffic and the continuous...
  14. D

    380.57 Possible port forwarding issue

    Ok, seems like disabling NAT Acceleration did the trick for me. What I don't like is that traffic is slower now. I have around 7-900 visitors per day, and when I did new tests the loading time increased by 10 seconds approximately without NAT Acceleration (CPU is overwhelmed) - so a fix in the...
  15. D

    380.57 Possible port forwarding issue

    Ok then. This is the steps I will take. 1. Reset 2. Update FW 3. Reset 4. Add ports and stuff manually 5. Disable NAT Acceleration 6. Reboot 7. Test if problem persists. I'll post the output here.
  16. D

    380.57 Possible port forwarding issue

    Ok, already tested. I won't then.
  17. D

    380.57 Possible port forwarding issue

    Thanks! Will try this later, maybe tomorrow. Downside is that sites will be slower on my server. Will this be fixed in upcoming versions?
  18. D

    Time to first byte increased with 380_57

    Then, why does it work perfectly when I downgrade? Just to be more clear, I think I put this the wrong way. It should be "either it's working, or it's not" instead of "time to first byte". Just recalled that time to first byte is 45 seconds in the tests I did, because that was how long it took...
  19. D

    380.57 Possible port forwarding issue

    I have a similiar (maye the same) issue as you guys: http://www.snbforums.com/threads/time-to-first-byte-increased-with-380_57.30406/
  20. D

    Time to first byte increased with 380_57

    Yes my issue is intermittent, but mostly failing. Problem with DMZ on the Reverse Proxy is that it has 2 IPs, one for port 80 and one for port 443. Any idea how I would solve that in a good way?
Top