Open ports on Direcway DW7000 satellite modem/router?

Does anyone know if the Direcway DW7000 can be configured to allow open
ports so
someone can access IP video from the internet? It's a self-monitored
surveillance situation, where the customer would want to view his home
(served by the Direcway service) from his work, where he has other
broadband.

The client tried to get help from DW tech support, but they were of no help.
All they would say was that the DW7000 "does not support pass-through of a
static IP address."

thank you,

jm

"JM" <(E-Mail Removed)> hath wroth:

>Does anyone know if the Direcway DW7000 can be configured to allow open
>ports so
>someone can access IP video from the internet?

Yes. It's called "port forwarding".
See:

http://www.stratosglobal.com/documen...pplemental.pdf
page 26.

>It's a self-monitored
>surveillance situation, where the customer would want to view his home
>(served by the Direcway service) from his work, where he has other
>broadband.
>
>The client tried to get help from DW tech support, but they were of no help.
>All they would say was that the DW7000 "does not support pass-through of a
>static IP address."

That's muddled. What they're trying to tell you is that you cannot
effectively use a DHCP assigned client for the camera. The camera has
to have a static IP address 192.168.1.xxx which will not change if the
DW7000 is reset or rebooted. The port forwarding page must know the
target devices IP address which should NOT change.

--
Jeff Liebermann (E-Mail Removed)
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Jeff, would you be so kind as to look at the discussion I'm having over on
"alt.internet.direcpc" called "Open ports in DW700" ??

I'm sorry, but I'm just not getting what this person is saying. I sincerely
appreciate the effort, and I'm the first to admit my limitations regarding
this topic, but I simply cannot reconcile the idea of a "DHCP-provisioned
non-forwardable NAT" with the statement that the customer likely has what he
needs.

I suspect there is a terminology breakdown, as I'm used to thinking in terms
of the static IP pointing to the router, then the ports pointing to the
desired device inside the network. Ports are forwarded, IP addresses are
not . . . right?? at least in this context. ???

I sincerely appreciate your help.


jm









"Jeff Liebermann" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> "JM" <(E-Mail Removed)> hath wroth:
>
> >Does anyone know if the Direcway DW7000 can be configured to allow open
> >ports so
> >someone can access IP video from the internet?
>
> Yes. It's called "port forwarding".
> See:
>
>
http://www.stratosglobal.com/documen...pplemental.pdf
> page 26.
>
> >It's a self-monitored
> >surveillance situation, where the customer would want to view his home
> >(served by the Direcway service) from his work, where he has other
> >broadband.
> >
> >The client tried to get help from DW tech support, but they were of no
help.
> >All they would say was that the DW7000 "does not support pass-through of
a
> >static IP address."
>
> That's muddled. What they're trying to tell you is that you cannot
> effectively use a DHCP assigned client for the camera. The camera has
> to have a static IP address 192.168.1.xxx which will not change if the
> DW7000 is reset or rebooted. The port forwarding page must know the
> target devices IP address which should NOT change.
>
> --
> Jeff Liebermann (E-Mail Removed)
> 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
> Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
> Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

JM wrote:

> Jeff, would you be so kind as to look at the discussion I'm having over on
> "alt.internet.direcpc" called "Open ports in DW700" ??
>
> I'm sorry, but I'm just not getting what this person is saying. I
> sincerely appreciate the effort, and I'm the first to admit my limitations
> regarding this topic, but I simply cannot reconcile the idea of a
> "DHCP-provisioned non-forwardable NAT" with the statement that the
> customer likely has what he needs.

Though Jeff is clearly an expert, what Don's telling you over there can be
taken as gospel. Don's _the_ expert on the direcpc group.

> I suspect there is a terminology breakdown, as I'm used to thinking in
> terms of the static IP pointing to the router, then the ports pointing to
> the
> desired device inside the network. Ports are forwarded, IP addresses are
> not . . . right?? at least in this context. ???

Yeeesssss... but IP addresses can be _passed_. As one who only has the
residential version of direcway, I don't know exactly how it works, but
it's my understanding that if you have a DirecWay/HughesNet plan with
static IPs, the modem will allow incoming connections. If you don't - it
won't. So all Don's told you is that if your client is on a business plan
with one or more static IPs he can make a connection to something on the
inside of the DW7000. If it's a device with a routeable address, you can
do it directly, if not you will need to use port forwarding - but you can
still do it.

The simplest thing to do is talk to the Hughes support about accessing an
HTTP server. Preferably, set up such a server so that they can get to it.
Once you have that configured, it shouldn't be too difficult to extrapolate
to accessing a network attached camera (for you, at least. I don't think
Hughes tech-support has quite grasped the concept of generalization!).
--
derek

On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 18:32:09 GMT, "JM" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Jeff, would you be so kind as to look at the discussion I'm having over on
>"alt.internet.direcpc" called "Open ports in DW700" ??

Nope. PBI/SBC/at&t news servers do not carry alt.internet.direcpc. It
does have alt.satellite.direcpc. Ok, I found it. Next time you ask
for something like this, kindly supply the correct newsgroup, correct
title, and preferably the article number.
<E3B1g.3897$(E-Mail Removed)>

>I'm sorry, but I'm just not getting what this person is saying.

What he's saying is that *YOU* have to supply him with the details of
what your customer has in the way of a service plan. Some clues on
the IP camera make and model would probably also be helpful. That
will eliminate Don's tendency to supply you with *ALL* the options you
might possibly see. (Hint: The more numbers you supply, the less
guesswork is necessary).

You mentioned that he has 5 static IP addresses. That means that the
DW7000 router is directly passing all 5 IP's to the LAN side. No NAT,
no filtering, no port forwarding, no nothing. Just 5 IP addresses
that appear on the ethernet port of the DW7000.

At this point, I need to know what else you've got to work with in the
system. From what little I can read between your lines, you do NOT
have any other router in the system. That means that if you go to one
of the computahs plugged into the DW7000, you will probably find that
it's IP address is 67.xxx.xxx.xxx.

It there be more than one computah, then it will grab the next of the
5 IP's until your run out of IP's. If you happen to have an unused
IP, then just configure the web camera for that IP with a static IP
and be done with it. No port forwarding is necesssary.

However, if you have more than 5 devices, then you'll need to add an
NAT router to the puzzle. You cannot do it in the DW7000 if you have
5 static IP's configured. That's what Don was trying to tell you. Do
you have more than 5 devices? Do you have a router? Can you add a
router. If you can add a router, configure it for one of the 5 static
IP's on the WAN side. I think you can handle for the port forwarding
with this NAT router. Ask for help if not.

>I sincerely appreciate your help.

I hate it when that happens.

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558 (E-Mail Removed)
# http://802.11junk.com (E-Mail Removed)
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

"Jeff Liebermann" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 18:32:09 GMT, "JM" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >Jeff, would you be so kind as to look at the discussion I'm having over
on
> >"alt.internet.direcpc" called "Open ports in DW700" ??
>
> Nope. PBI/SBC/at&t news servers do not carry alt.internet.direcpc. It
> does have alt.satellite.direcpc. Ok, I found it. Next time you ask
> for something like this, kindly supply the correct newsgroup, correct
> title, and preferably the article number.
> <E3B1g.3897$(E-Mail Removed)>
>
> >I'm sorry, but I'm just not getting what this person is saying.
>
> What he's saying is that *YOU* have to supply him with the details of
> what your customer has in the way of a service plan. Some clues on
> the IP camera make and model would probably also be helpful. That
> will eliminate Don's tendency to supply you with *ALL* the options you
> might possibly see. (Hint: The more numbers you supply, the less
> guesswork is necessary).
>
> You mentioned that he has 5 static IP addresses. That means that the
> DW7000 router is directly passing all 5 IP's to the LAN side. No NAT,
> no filtering, no port forwarding, no nothing. Just 5 IP addresses
> that appear on the ethernet port of the DW7000.
>
> At this point, I need to know what else you've got to work with in the
> system. From what little I can read between your lines, you do NOT
> have any other router in the system. That means that if you go to one
> of the computahs plugged into the DW7000, you will probably find that
> it's IP address is 67.xxx.xxx.xxx.
>
> It there be more than one computah, then it will grab the next of the
> 5 IP's until your run out of IP's. If you happen to have an unused
> IP, then just configure the web camera for that IP with a static IP
> and be done with it. No port forwarding is necesssary.
>
> However, if you have more than 5 devices, then you'll need to add an
> NAT router to the puzzle. You cannot do it in the DW7000 if you have
> 5 static IP's configured. That's what Don was trying to tell you. Do
> you have more than 5 devices? Do you have a router? Can you add a
> router. If you can add a router, configure it for one of the 5 static
> IP's on the WAN side. I think you can handle for the port forwarding
> with this NAT router. Ask for help if not.
>
> >I sincerely appreciate your help.
>
> I hate it when that happens.
>

Sorry about the n/g misidentification.

I knew I was taking my life into my own hands by asking for help from the
periphery of this whole issue. However, this is one of those times when I
had little choice, because of how important it is to help solve the problem.
Ideally, the guys installing the video would get out of the way, and I would
go work on the project directly, but it's not that simple. So I'm trying to
feed them good info, using only tidbits that I can manage to get out of
them. The bottom line is that these guys have no business doing what
they're doing, and they are desparately trying to maintain appearances to
the contrary.

The pieces I couldn't put together were your and Don's explanation
concerning the static IPs with HughesNet's repeated statement that the
DW7000 "does not support pass through [of IP addresses]." It's obvious at
this point that either the HN techs don't understand the issue, are stating
it incorrectly, or something is being lost in the conversation between HN
and the ill-equipped guys on site.

Your clarification of Don's information cleared it all up, and I'm sorry to
say that yet again I sincerely appreciate it ; )

jm

"JM" <(E-Mail Removed)> hath wroth:

>Sorry about the n/g misidentification.

Also the model number misidentification and lack for numbers.
Answering questions usually requires two or three things:
1. What problem are you trying to solve? (What's it going to do?)
2. What do you have to work with? (Hardware, software, numbers).
3. What have you done so far and what happened? (Error messages).

You did well on #1 and #3. #2 is almost totally lacking.

>So I'm trying to
>feed them good info, using only tidbits that I can manage to get out of
>them.

OK, that explains the problem. You're forgiven (this time only).

This does not sound like a very workable arrangement. I've worked
with a crew of former electricians pretending to be structured wiring
contractors. Between the terminology and language problems, there was
also a considerable amount of defensive arrogance involved (myself
included). T'was no fun, but the job was eventually done after only
two protracted yelling sessions in the parking lot. It's amazing how
much information appears when they realize that your really do want
and need it.

>The bottom line is that these guys have no business doing what
>they're doing, and they are desparately trying to maintain appearances to
>the contrary.

Welcome to alt.internet.wireless.management-advice. My first few jobs
in electronics were similar. I thought I knew everything. I soon
learned that I didn't. However, I didn't want to let anyone know that
I was incompetent. So, I crammed, studied, and did everything except
ask questions of the people that should have been managing me. The
results were ummmm.... not very good.

I suspect your guys have the same problem. They don't want to
communicate with you because you might discover (or verify) that they
don't know what they're doing. Well, if you must work with them,
encourage them to communicate by mentioning that nobody else need know
what's happening. If they trust you, they'll give you what you need,
and maybe even listen to your advice and suggestions. That worked for
me.


--
Jeff Liebermann (E-Mail Removed)
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

"Jeff Liebermann" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> "JM" <(E-Mail Removed)> hath wroth:
>
> >Sorry about the n/g misidentification.
>
> Also the model number misidentification and lack for numbers.
> Answering questions usually requires two or three things:
> 1. What problem are you trying to solve? (What's it going to do?)
> 2. What do you have to work with? (Hardware, software, numbers).
> 3. What have you done so far and what happened? (Error messages).
>
> You did well on #1 and #3. #2 is almost totally lacking.
>
> >So I'm trying to
> >feed them good info, using only tidbits that I can manage to get out of
> >them.
>
> OK, that explains the problem. You're forgiven (this time only).
>
> This does not sound like a very workable arrangement. I've worked
> with a crew of former electricians pretending to be structured wiring
> contractors. Between the terminology and language problems, there was
> also a considerable amount of defensive arrogance involved (myself
> included). T'was no fun, but the job was eventually done after only
> two protracted yelling sessions in the parking lot. It's amazing how
> much information appears when they realize that your really do want
> and need it.
>
> >The bottom line is that these guys have no business doing what
> >they're doing, and they are desparately trying to maintain appearances to
> >the contrary.
>
> Welcome to alt.internet.wireless.management-advice. My first few jobs
> in electronics were similar. I thought I knew everything. I soon
> learned that I didn't. However, I didn't want to let anyone know that
> I was incompetent. So, I crammed, studied, and did everything except
> ask questions of the people that should have been managing me. The
> results were ummmm.... not very good.
>
> I suspect your guys have the same problem. They don't want to
> communicate with you because you might discover (or verify) that they
> don't know what they're doing. Well, if you must work with them,
> encourage them to communicate by mentioning that nobody else need know
> what's happening. If they trust you, they'll give you what you need,
> and maybe even listen to your advice and suggestions. That worked for
> me.
>

Good advice. Thanks.

A complicating factor is that the main guy on site is a former employee of
mine, when I was in management for an interconnect company. He is a very
good telecom tech, but like many telecom guys, he is getting left behind in
the VoIP / convergence / IP PBX evolution. He tried very, very hard to hide
this fact from me, but of course over time it became obvious. With our
excellent standing with several leading manufacturers, I was able to provide
him good support to delay the inevitable. I even sent him to 2-3 very
expensive schools.

Now that he works for a much smaller company with fewer support channels, he
has to use what is available to him, which means calling on me often. I
want to help him; I really do (which should be obvious by my searching for
answers with only limited information to offer people like you who try to
help). But this current situation is representative of what I deal with.
He does not understand networking, IP addressing, subnetting, routing, port
forwarding, etc. So I'm sure much of what he reports to me of his
conversations with HN or the makers of the video equipment is full of errors
and omissions.

But I'm determined to help him, because he is trying extremely hard to make
a living after some pretty hard knocks. The good news is that the video
stuff comprises only about 20% of his business, with the balance being
installation and support of small-to-medium digital TDM key telephone
systems.

I think with what I've garnered from the two ng's I can push the project on
through.

Again, thanks.


jm