Asus RT-N56U Is this the router for me?

[Gronnie]

I believe OP was referred here from AVSForum. He is having trouble getting his Panasonic DMP-BD85K BD player to connect to Vieracast. Here is the thread: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1230391
His problem starts I believe around post 2918.

 

[rhombus]

Yikes. Poor guy must be at the end of his tether.

I'm not convinced a new router will necessarily fix this though, but it might.

Seen as the whole of Viera cast is inaccessible, my first step would be to try setting the primary DNS server on the blu ray player to 8.8.8.8 (Google DNS) with secondary DNS server blank. And then try 208.67.222.222 (OpenDNS)...

 

[Shikami]

Joe G, You never have to open ports for that which you initiated internally. When you communicate to a host you create an internal to external mapping allowing packets to ingress from whom you created a connection with. For example, if you were to go to a web site (80), FTP server (21/22), email (110) you do not need to open a port for these. However, if you were to host these services you would then have to. Due to the fact that NAT segregates you from the public domain of the Internet. There needs to be a mapping of how to go from an external request to an internal request. This is punching holes or port forwarding.

I am unsure what the problem can be, but I am thinking that the problem can be possibly from the modem. It could very well be a router/NAT device and is not bridged. Your problem is very similar to this particular issue, but I have my doubts. So, what is your cable modem? The name, moniker, and model, is what is needed.

Unless your problem is simply not configuring the player in its network settings properly. Did you run the connection wizard?

 

[stevech]

You do have to open tertiary ports - such as FTP without the passive mode, where FTP on your home PC goes out on port 20 and the FTP server connects back on a port of its choice to do transfers (dir list, file xfer).

Passive mode FTP avoids this firewall issue by telling the client what port to use for the transfer.

I think most decent routers today do stateful packet inspection (SPI) on popular protocols like FTP non-passive, to "automagically" open the inward port. This is a kind of firewall.

Perhaps some multimedia servers are too new for routers' SPI to recognize the protocol.

 

[rhombus]

How do we know Viera CAST does not need to accept incoming connections? It does have many apps such as Skype that might need to. And isn't a double-NAT issue just a port forwarding issue in disguise?

Anyway, as it turns out, a quick call to a very reliable friends confirms that (in the UK with a Panasonic DMP-BDT110 blu ray player), you can connect to Viera CAST and use YouTube even with UPNP disabled on the router, and with all incoming ports blocked.

I think this could be:

Local network issue
DNS issue
Router firewall issue (including simple over-zealous blocking of certain outbound ports, which therefore do need opening as the OP suggests)
Panasonic issue
One of those things we might never know

I would like to see what happens if everything including router is rebooted and power-cycled, with a cable connection not wireless used, and the DNS settings I mentioned earlier are used.

Also, does a different (borrowed, stolen or begged) router actually fix this?

 

[Shikami]

You do have to open tertiary ports - such as FTP without the passive mode, where FTP on your home PC goes out on port 20 and the FTP server connects back on a port of its choice to do transfers (dir list, file xfer).

Passive mode FTP avoids this firewall issue by telling the client what port to use for the transfer.

I should not have been so generalized, due to the text book example of a rare exception. True, but active has not been the preferred method for FTP due to firewalls. The connection is established however the server sends the data via TCP (20) to the host but that port has not been mapped from the external source, so the packets will be dropped. This is the reason for passive FTP. The internal source is mapped to the eternal source and is allowed to traverse the NAT boundary.

I think most decent routers today do stateful packet inspection (SPI) on popular protocols like FTP non-passive, to "automagically" open the inward port. This is a kind of firewall.

It's "automagically" passive FTP . SPI is the firewall and is the checker of the sequence of packets to confirm its state and allow it or not into the network. Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Transfer_Protocol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stateful_firewall
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_address_translation

How do we know Viera CAST does not need to accept incoming connections?

Becuase this is how NAT works. When communication is initiated internally (iAddr:iPort) an external source (eAddr:ePort) is mapped to that internal source via NAT. If the player was to host a service, and was to be accessible for that service then it would need to have ports mapped to that host. NAT segregates you from the public domain of the Internet. It is not a firewall and it is not a secure or preventative firewall technology. It was really created to extend the usage of limited IP's. However, inadvertently it create problems due to how the IP works.

If you are to access a web server you do not need to open a port for access to that server's resources; you are an external source. If you were to have a web server for access to the public, then yes you will need to map that common service port to the host on the private domain.

It does have many apps such as Skype that might need to.

Skype is UPnP. You never need to punch a hole if you use UPnP; it will do it for you. However, this is different issue due to SIP, and the fact that you are hosting a service when people try to call you they will be unable to connect.

And isn't a double-NAT issue just a port forwarding issue in disguise?

No. Technically speaking in terms of SOHO routers, it is a poorly configured network. Having two private NAT networks to route a public request to a host can create issues and is not optimally configured.

Anyway, as it turns out, a quick call to a very reliable friends confirms that (in the UK with a Panasonic DMP-BDT110 blu ray player), you can connect to Viera CAST and use YouTube even with UPNP disabled on the router, and with all incoming ports blocked.

Of course, as I said, before mapped internal source to an external source. And the ports are not blocked, because you initiated communication to allow packet to traverse from public to private. Joe G. does not need to touch one thing on the router if his network, and the device are properly configured.

 

[rhombus]

Shikami, my friend, I think we should agree we are not on the same book, let alone the same page

 

[JOE.G]

I have been on the phone with Netflix, TWC advanced Support and Panasonic advanced support, And they are all blaming the router. I can watch Netflix though My ps3 which is th furthest from the router with no problems and also though any of the laptops and ipods. Just the Blu ray player wont allow me to.

 

[Shikami]

Joe G., did you run the wizard in the network menu? Is the player associated with the access point (has wireless access)? I am sure they had you go through this step, correct?

 

[JOE.G]

Yes the Player will say I am connected it even lets me update the firmware wireless, But I can't access any other feature.

 

[Shikami]

Curious the player has an Ethernet port correct? Is it possible to try this connection, and have you? If you have note, remove the entries for wireless by resetting to defaults (pg 29 of the manual). I wonder if it is the adapter that is included is the trouble. It is a USB adapter that was included with the player for Wi-Fi, correct?

 

[JOE.G]

Correct it came with an Adaptor, There isnt a tv near the router, I guess I could Move the a tv and the player to try it, How would I do this as far as hook up?

 

[RogerSC]

Wanted to mention that there's a couple of ways to get a "hard-wired" ethernet connection at your TV, even though the router is elsewhere. There's powerline networking, and MoCA (that uses the TV coax cable in your walls).

I'm personally using MoCA between my router and Roku box (by the TV), since I found wireless to be too variable for consistent video streaming.

 

[JOE.G]

Never heard of it Is it expensive? does it work well?


Any Suggestions on Routers.

 

[RogerSC]

Yes, MoCA works well for me. I'm getting about 85Mb/s on a very large file transfer, plenty of bandwidth for my streaming video needs. The cost was about $100 for 2 Netgear MoCA adapters at Amazon. You put one by your router where your cable modem is, and the other where the cable for the TV is.

If you get serious about this, it is easier to do if you don't have satellite cable TV, although I've heard that it can still be used in that case.

Another thing is that faster versions are coming along, supposedly sometime next year. In my opinion there's definitely more headroom for speed, since you're using a double-shielded coax cable, as opposed to a noisy powerline.

I also have another adapter in a bedroom to serve a desktop. It replaced a wireless-n adapter that was on the desktop. There has been no problem with having enough bandwidth for the desktop as well as the TV. They both act like a hard-wired ethernet connection, very reliable.

 

[Shikami]

Never heard of it Is it expensive? does it work well?

They can work very well and be helpful due to limitation of wireless. But they can be costly, especially with your limited budget. MoCA is very nice but both devices can be affected by the wiring of your house; coax or power wiring that is: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001N85NMI/?tag=snbforums-20

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001XUQOHE/?tag=snbforums-20

It seems that testing is physically limited due to the location and possibly size/weight. All you need is a small monitor/TV that can hook up to the player to give you display output. Along with the Ethernet cable and such too, of course. Move the monitor/TV to that location and test it.

I still think the RT-N56U can be a good router for you.

 

[RogerSC]

Wow, the price of the MoCA adapters has gone down again...wonder if this is in anticipation that there are faster ones to come, or just a sale, time will tell. Good price at Amazon, though, in my opinion. Makes the cost very comparable to powerline networking hardware.

 

[Shikami]

Makes the cost very comparable to powerline networking hardware.

Indeed. Especially if one considers a possible 270Mbp/s compared to a possible 85Mbps.

 

[rhombus]

Indeed. Especially if one considers a possible 270Mbp/s compared to a possible 85Mbps.

Where do you get those numbers from?

I've measured over 170Mbps of application level throughput from a pair of Homeplugs!

 

[Shikami]

Where do you get those numbers from?

I've measured over 170Mbps of application level throughput from a pair of Homeplugs!

That is because I am talking about a particular situation. I said Indeed; which by definition is: Used to emphasize a description, typically of a quality or condition: "it was a very good buy indeed"; that description being RogerSC's. Which means that it is a good consideration, especially when one considers a "possible" 270Mbp/s to "possible" 85Mbp/s. I am not talking about what is better, and giving comparison of products at all. And this is due to a coworker of mine using this very adapter: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001AZUTCS/?tag=snbforums-20

He only gets 6MB/s....... could have been more because MoCA always supported more bandwidth. Powerline adapters have started to recently scale higher than MoCA. I said go MoCA, but he decided on powerline instead. So, indeed......