Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[dicrouthamel]

Is it possible to use the built in ftp server behind a router on a port other than 21?  What is the default passive port range?

[fordem]

I don't see why not - it might depend on the particular router you were using though - just as an example, I can forward port 210 on the external interface to 21 on the internal

[TaVARUS]

The previous poster is correct the you can use Virtual Server or Port Forward to open ports to your FTP Hosted Service.
 
    As for the "Default Passive Port Range" question, it depends on your current OS. For Windows, the Default range prior to Vista and Server 2008 was TCP ports 1025 through 5000. Post Vista and Server 2008, and compliancy with Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) recommendations the default range is now TCP port 49152 through 65535.

    The following Links can be used to permanently change or lock down your hosted FTP Passive ports:
IIS6
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/WindowsServer2003/Library/IIS/d2405f36-06c3-4468-a8b0-eb0442ed1889.mspx?mfr=true

IIS7
http://learn.iis.net/page.aspx/309/configuring-ftp-firewall-settings/

Mac OS X
http://forums.macosxhints.com/archive/index.php/t%2020%203C/t-58679.html

Linux, Ubunto, Fedora Core:
?

[dicrouthamel]

I was referring to the default passive port range used by pure-ftpd - the ftp software with firmware 1.04.  After a bit of "hacking", I found that in order to do what I want to do I must start pure-ftpd myself from a command line or script, and not from the web.  Something like this,

pure-ftpd -c <A> -I <B> -P <C> -p <D:E> -S <F> &

where

-c      --maxclientsnumber      <opt>
-I      --maxidletime   <opt>
-p      --passiveportrange      <opt>
-P      --forcepassiveip        <opt>
-S      --bind  <opt>

In a future firmware it would be useful if you could let us define the passive port range and passive ip address.  Although I'm pretty sure I could hack the webs binary and html pages to allow configuration myself, I really shouldn't have to

[TaVARUS]

O.K.

Can you elaborate on your future firmware request? When I read it, ...it still sounds allot like a Port Forward (Present F/W capable) ...were we know the Passive IP, but still need to know the servers "Passive Port Range" ...for us to truncate that needed/required range into the actual rule/entry of the Port Forward feature.