Unofficial magicJack Forum

Unofficial magicJack Forum

Your Unofficial magicJack and magicJack Plus phone service information resource
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
UDP 5060 & 5070 doesn't yield duplex audio

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Unofficial magicJack Forum -> Magic Jack Technical Support
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ctowzey
MagicJack Newbie


Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Posts: 6

PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:19 am    Post subject: UDP 5060 & 5070 doesn't yield duplex audio

Hi, first off, let me say that I tried searching and read what I could find on ports. Having said that, I could be "search challenged" Wink

I took the MJ KB info as fact (UDP 5060/5070) and ended up spending 3-4 hours going thru scripts with MJ tech support. I finally sent the first one back believing it was defective. The new one did the same so I tried bypassing all devices, incl. my symantec firewall security device (no port blocking at all) and lo and behold- great audio- perfect funtion. When I re-enabled to filtering I got no audio again. Went into "unrestricted" mode and got audio back again (with NAT enabled) so I know it's not the firewall device.

So I opened another session asking which OTHER ports were being used besides 5060/5070 and go nowhere. My problem is that with only those two UDP ports (plus the usual http/https, smtp, etc..) I get no audio. No error messages, but just no duplex audio. I can dial, and I get dialtone, etc..-just no audio. Here is my question: is it possible that the audio is coming thru some other port range (i.e. dynamic)? I use NAT on the device as well as the packet filtering. I suppose I could install a port monitoring utility and watch when I make a call but I hosed the one I had because my endpoint security kept flagging it as spyware. Anyone have further port info?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
VaHam
Dan Should Pay Me


Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Posts: 851

PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 10:51 am    Post subject: Re: UDP 5060 & 5070 doesn't yield duplex audio

ctowzey wrote:
Hi, first off, let me say that I tried searching and read what I could find on ports. Having said that, I could be "search challenged" Wink

I took the MJ KB info as fact (UDP 5060/5070) and ended up spending 3-4 hours going thru scripts with MJ tech support. I finally sent the first one back believing it was defective. The new one did the same so I tried bypassing all devices, incl. my symantec firewall security device (no port blocking at all) and lo and behold- great audio- perfect funtion. When I re-enabled to filtering I got no audio again. Went into "unrestricted" mode and got audio back again (with NAT enabled) so I know it's not the firewall device.

So I opened another session asking which OTHER ports were being used besides 5060/5070 and go nowhere. My problem is that with only those two UDP ports (plus the usual http/https, smtp, etc..) I get no audio. No error messages, but just no duplex audio. I can dial, and I get dialtone, etc..-just no audio. Here is my question: is it possible that the audio is coming thru some other port range (i.e. dynamic)? I use NAT on the device as well as the packet filtering. I suppose I could install a port monitoring utility and watch when I make a call but I hosed the one I had because my endpoint security kept flagging it as spyware. Anyone have further port info?


MJ uses RTP (UDP) in the port range 10,000-20,000 for audio usually NAT handles this Ok but you may have to open this range. Sounds like it is being restricted.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
az2008
MagicJack Sensei


Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Posts: 1404
Location: Tempe, AZ

PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 12:00 pm    Post subject: Re: UDP 5060 & 5070 doesn't yield duplex audio

You shouldn't have to open any inbound ports on your firewall. MJ initiates all connections to its servers. Are you using a Linksys router? They're known to have problems like you describe.

Mark
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ctowzey
MagicJack Newbie


Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Posts: 6

PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:21 pm    Post subject: That did it!

to: VaHam

What a pleasure to run into someone who knows the correct info and addressed my question without the extra detours!!! Thank you for that! Obviously, adding the UDP 10k-20k range got the audio working for me.

I wonder why the 2nd tier support people at MJ couldn't just give me that information when I asked them point blank. Instead, they felt obligated to run me thru the same lame troubeshooting script over and over and then insist that it only uses UDP 5060/5070!!! I can't quite understand that - it ended up taking me thru enormous inconvenience and wasted time returning a perfectly good unit, getting a replacement, then once again sitting thru hours of meaningless troubleshooting intersperced with long chat wait times.

Anyway, sorry for the mini-rant, and again, thanks for the straight answer.
And thank you Mark for participating. BTW, I found the Linksys issue right away with my preliminary search of the message board. But I'm sure many people have hit that wall - so thanks for helping others.

Best,
Chris
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
az2008
MagicJack Sensei


Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Posts: 1404
Location: Tempe, AZ

PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:36 pm    Post subject: Re: That did it!

ctowzey wrote:
BTW, I found the Linksys issue right away with my preliminary search of the message board. But I'm sure many people have hit that wall - so thanks for helping others.


I'll update the wiki FAQ to indicate that opening UDP ports 10000-20000 may fix the problem with Linksys routers. That's a lot of ports to open. Personally, I'd try flashing it to the latest Linksys firmware (even if it's the same version, perhaps it's just a bad flash). Or, switching to Tomato or DD-WRT. (I think Tomato is easier for the average, casual user. But, doesn't support as many routers. DD-WRT may be the only choice for many.).

Mark
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
VaHam
Dan Should Pay Me


Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Posts: 851

PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:43 pm    Post subject: Re: That did it!

ctowzey wrote:
to: VaHam

What a pleasure to run into someone who knows the correct info and addressed my question without the extra detours!!! Thank you for that! Obviously, adding the UDP 10k-20k range got the audio working for me.

I wonder why the 2nd tier support people at MJ couldn't just give me that information when I asked them point blank. Instead, they felt obligated to run me thru the same lame troubeshooting script over and over and then insist that it only uses UDP 5060/5070!!! I can't quite understand that - it ended up taking me thru enormous inconvenience and wasted time returning a perfectly good unit, getting a replacement, then once again sitting thru hours of meaningless troubleshooting intersperced with long chat wait times.

Anyway, sorry for the mini-rant, and again, thanks for the straight answer.
And thank you Mark for participating. BTW, I found the Linksys issue right away with my preliminary search of the message board. But I'm sure many people have hit that wall - so thanks for helping others.

Best,
Chris


Your welcome Chris! I am glad that you got it working.

Was it because of the Linksys router problem that your NAT wasn't working as it usually does; or are you using another router/software which has the same problem?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ctowzey
MagicJack Newbie


Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Posts: 6

PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:50 pm    Post subject: I don't use a LinkSys

Mark,
I probably wasn't clear enough with my response. I don't use the LinkSys, I use a Symantec Security Device, which controls the ports incoming and outgoing. So the 10k-20k issue is not related to the LinkSys - so probably not a good thing to post.

What I meant in my reply to you was that I "found" the information about the LinkSys router in my search prior to posting my question. I probably would not have even posted anything had I been using that particular device since that info would have tipped me off. I tried to be clear in my first post that I had, a) done a little searching before posting, and b) was using the Symantec device instead.

Sorry for any confusion on that point Wink
Chris
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ctowzey
MagicJack Newbie


Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Posts: 6

PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:57 pm    Post subject: Yes, smaller range would be good

I forgot to agree with your comment about having to open 10,000 ports. Yes, I would prefer a much smaller range but if the MJ assigns those ports dynamically in that range you would never know which one to open. However, having said that, I may still fire up a port monitor utility and try to narrow it down at some point.

If anyone has more specific info for the duplex audio ports used that may narrow the range -that would be a cool thing to share (hint, hint...)

In the meantime, at least it works and I didn't have to open all 65,000 Wink

Thanks again.
Chris
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
az2008
MagicJack Sensei


Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Posts: 1404
Location: Tempe, AZ

PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 5:15 pm    Post subject: Re: Yes, smaller range would be good

ctowzey wrote:
However, having said that, I may still fire up a port monitor utility and try to narrow it down at some point.


It would be interesting to discover why the Semantic security device requires open ports when MagicJack doesn't try to open any ports on the firewall.

I don't know if you have a specific reason to run that product. If not, I'd suggest you spend $50 on a Linksys WRT54GL and flash it with Tomato. Then you don't have to open any incoming ports. And, you can setup QoS. (Not to disparage DD-WRT. I just focus on Tomato because I think it's simpler and easier for the average person.).

Mark
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
xxM5xx
MagicJack Contributor


Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Posts: 50

PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2009 4:14 am    Post subject: DD-WRT

az2008 wrote:
ctowzey wrote:
However, having said that, I may still fire up a port monitor utility and try to narrow it down at some point.


It would be interesting to discover why the Semantic security device requires open ports when MagicJack doesn't try to open any ports on the firewall.

I don't know if you have a specific reason to run that product. If not, I'd suggest you spend $50 on a Linksys WRT54GL and flash it with Tomato. Then you don't have to open any incoming ports. And, you can setup QoS. (Not to disparage DD-WRT. I just focus on Tomato because I think it's simpler and easier for the average person.).

Mark


Mark
You keep saying that, but I am an average person and I have no problem with any setting aspects of DD-WRT. IMO- anyone smart enough to flash a router, is smart enough to use DD-WRT.

I don't want to hijack this thread but, I don't like to have any functionality hidden from me. First thing I do on people's PCs when I encounter them is unhide file extensions and unhide system files and folders. I want "control" baby, I want to see everything. If Tomato has fewer setting choices (in the interest of simplicity) than DD-WRT then I want DD-WRT. If each has the exact same number of choices, then which is easier to use is a pure judgment call, one probably based on familiarity over actual ergonomics.

Whatever. As people can see I like the DD-WRT.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
az2008
MagicJack Sensei


Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Posts: 1404
Location: Tempe, AZ

PostPosted: Tue Jan 13, 2009 10:04 am    Post subject: Re: DD-WRT

xxM5xx wrote:
I am an average person and I have no problem with any setting aspects of DD-WRT. ... Whatever. As people can see I like the DD-WRT.


I really need those executive summaries I asked for. Smile

I'm not average, but I prefer Tomato's simplicity. It's not that it "hides" things. It's just easier to use. No micro, standard, big-bertha versions. No VX-killers. No vlans. It meets my needs. And, even though I can get to a command prompt to do things, it does everything I need from the UI. (Nothing's "hidden" that I want to see.).

I've tried DD-WRT. It didn't grab me. The learning curve seemed rather steep. Too much info to assimilate to just use it. Too many installation instructions. Too much talk about how to "unbrick" a router. And then, based upon my subjective comparison, it felt slower. The QoS definitely didn't work as well. That subjective impression was borne out by benchmark tests I saw (http://www.linksysinfo.org/forums/showthread.php?t=60335)

I try to be fair when pointing out why I recommend Tomato. Less drama, *but* (and possibly because of) it supports fewer routers, has less features, etc. If that irritates you, you'll have to get used to it.

Also, you said in another thread that both you and I believe flashing to Tomato or DD-WRT is best. You should consult me before speaking for me. I don't share your opinion. I believe whatever an MJ user is comfortable with, and gets the job done, is "best." That may be upgrading to the latest Linksys firmware (in that case you were addressing). It may be using Hawking Broadband Booster.

All I can say is that DD-WRT has a lot more features, and is thus more complex with a greater learning curve just to get up and running. I get the impression it has a greater chance of "bricking" a router. If I needed those features I would use it. But, I just don't need to absorb all the details that go with DD-WRT. I have enough things to keep me occupied. Tomato just works, without a lot of idiosyncrasies. (If you deny those idiosyncrasies exist, then I would encourage anyone considering using a 3rd party firmware to study both DD-WRT and Tomato, and see for themselves.).

Mark
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Unofficial magicJack Forum -> Magic Jack Technical Support All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Powered by phpBB Ultra Turbo Extended Edition Live © 2001-9999, phpBB Group
magicJack and magicJack Plus are trademarks of magicJack LLP. This website is in no way affiliated, endorsed, or sponsored by magicJack LLP, and is an unofficial forum for consumers to openly communicate regarding their experiences with the magicJack products.