RV180 port forwarding doesn't work

[mattiassercu]

Today i installed an RV180 VPN router as replacement for a netscreen ns-5GT.

Exactly the same configuration, everything works, except port forwarding from WAN to a host inside NAT.

My ports are open (online port-scanner sees the ports as open), the hosts are accepting connections, but a connection can't be made.

Probably a bug in the firmware.

Regards

[Tom Watts]

Hello Mattias,

There are some open issues with port forwarding on the RV180. Please call the SBSC for the proper forensics. USA and Canada is 1.866.606.1866. Reference here for all numbers

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/support/tsd_cisco_small_business_support_center_contacts.html

-Tom

[Terp84Alum]

Does normal port forwarding work? What I mean is coming from remote and wanting to connect to a PC with a static IP.

Sent from Cisco Technical Support iPad App

[mattiassercu]

What is the other sort of port forwarding?

[mccatald]

I have the same problem. Please help me.

I am disappointed about this because i have spent a lot of money to buy this router and this simple function does not work.

May you send me the beta firmware?

Thanks

[m.susc]

Tom, I'm guessing you're somehow affiliated to Cisco, apologize if that's not the case.

Let me ask: shouldn't by this time Cisco released a corrected firmware to solve this horrendous bug? I happen to have the same issue: I use the PPoE setting under WAN and port forwarding isn't working at all. Yes, I did my homework, I know how to configure it (horrendously complicated, but I know how). I installed the latest firmwared, dated January 2015, and still... the port forwarding bug is still there. Anything I'm missing?

Thanks,

Mariano

[klp992001]

I have exactly the same issue. I have replaced a "domestic" router with a RV180. The "domestic" router used to port-forward RDP, HTTP to a server on the internal network from internet. Having set up the same rules on the RV180, nothing works. This is clearly a firmware issue as with the old (netgear) router there was never a problem,

The RV can be seen externally via PING (when enabled), and can be logged into using remote management. I also have QuickVPN running to it fine, and once VPN in, can PING the target server for which I am trying to open the RDP port. I can also RDP from the VPN (but this is not what I want to achieve).

I did notice the first time I configured the router that I set the Access Rule, created a custom service for RDP (TCP PORT 3389), then checking the Port Forward Rule Table screen, there was no Port showing for the destination ip. I set this in the Port Forward screen, but it didn't make any difference.

This is used for a small business for which I am consulting - I am embarrassed to have recommended CISCO.

[Tom Watts]

Hello Kym,

I definitely know the frustration. If you would like this addressed, you need to open a service request, we may gather all necessary documentation and data collection then submit for review.

As I had indicated above, the RV180 does have some issues with the port forwarding. The sooner you can make a service request and go through the process, the sooner Cisco can help you address and reach a resolution.

USA and Canada is 1.866.606.1866. Reference here for all numbers

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/support/tsd_cisco_small_business_support_center_contacts.html

-Tom

[mattiassercu]

I already contacted the support center and they will 'check my settings'.

The product is released in april 2012 with a known problem and today it is still not solved. Will it ever by solved or is Cisco just giving the impression they are looking for a solution by 'collecting data'?

[Tom Watts]

Hi Mattias, when calling the SBSC, it is correct. We do need to verify the setting you set on the router. We also should verify you're able to establish the tcp/udp socket locally on the LAN. After verifying correct connectivity locally, then it can be worked on over the WAN. Being on the latest firmware, a factory reset performed, manually configure the forward, if it fails, a WAN and LAN packet capture should be performed. Next any kind of firewall log would be checked to see if there is a dropped or accepted packet for the expected traffic. Additional data collection such as what kind of modem you have and who is your ISP may be asked. With this information it would be passed for review and approved or denied for escalation depending on the outcome of the preliminary data collection on your call.

Cisco does not have a cynical demeanor. The product is exactly what you indicate, new. During the initial release, the product went through a capture process to ensure stability. After a 2 month capture process, several pieces of internal documentation happened. This was a separation of information between hardware failure and software issues. In July, there were only a few complaints about the port forwarding, I think mostly because the product did not have a wider audience yet. On July 26, there was enough data where an issue has been identified with the port forwarding.

Everything takes time. It takes time to figure out how something is not functioning. It takes time to code the correct fix. And it takes time to test it. And, when it does happen, the development team will create a beta firmware and offer it to the cases that have been escalated to the tier 2 team. If any beta firmware development yields positive results from customer feedback and internal testing and there is a substantial indication the issue is resolved then there will be finalized firmware for production release.

The only thing I may implore, if the issue is very dire, follow through with the tier 1 process, if proven the forwarding doesn't work, the case should be escalated then managed from the tier 2 team. which work directly with product management and development.

-Tom

[mattiassercu]

Thanks for the clear answer, let's hope the problem will be fixed soon.

Regards, Mattias

[mattiassercu]

1 month further and still no news about the problem.

[floriankraatz]

Dear Tom,

we just bought the same router and run into the issue described here. So portforwarding works, if the router is used with a WAN-connection with static IP-assignment and doesn't work if used with PPPoE (address assigned by our providers DHCP-Server).

As I understand from the last post of Mattias in this thread (https://supportforums.cisco.com/message/3764594#3764594), he obtained a beta firmware (v1.0.2.2) from a developer that fixes this issue.

So my question is: When will this firmware be released to other customers? Is it possible to obtain it now, even though it is in beta state?

We really would like to put our rv180 in service.

Thanks in advance,

Florian Kraatz

[Benjamin_Lin]

Can you provide a link with this firmware?

Thanks.

[pitti2222]

Same problem and there is another thread with same issue as well:

https://supportforums.cisco.com/message/3707716?referring_site=sds&channel=pkwidgets&id#3707716