No Audio

[jaxisland]

I have opened up 5060, 5070, 80, and 443 which now allows me to dial and ring the phone. But when I pickup there is no audio.

Ive been through magicjacks online help and they are useless. But Im using a Motorola SBG900, if I disable the firewall completely it works. As soon as I enable it the audio goes away. What am I missing?

[devinmccloud]

I think you answered your own problem. The next step would be to act on it. Reconfigure your firewall to allow magicjack incoming and outgoing packets.Pretty simple. There's always google for help!

[jaxisland]

I did open the ports specified my MagicJack and it still doesnt work. why does all the features work, but no voice?

[devinmccloud]

Jax, when all else fails. Take a rj-45 cable straight from your pc to the modem. Hook up MJ and then test your problems. If it fixes the problem, start to add other components(e.g. router ect.). If one breaks your connection, that's your problem, fix it! If it still doesn't work check your firewall and anti-virus to see if they are blocking it. If it still doesn't work IM tech support!

[timdoc1]

I have the same SBG900 and the same problem.
I can only get it to work by unblocking other UDP ports on the SBG900.

I actually can get it to work while I am making the call by unblocking the ports the SBG tells me it is currently blocking!!!

Problem is, next time MJ uses two other ports! Doh!

[az2008]

I have the same SBG900 and the same problem.
I can only get it to work by unblocking other UDP ports on the SBG900.

I actually can get it to work while I am making the call by unblocking the ports the SBG tells me it is currently blocking!!!

Problem is, next time MJ uses two other ports! Doh!

I just read the manual for the SBG900 (http://www.google.com/url?sa=U&start=7& ... znq2SdZatA). The problem is that it probably blocks external access.

See page 35 (of the PDF, 29 of the printed page) for an example of the Firewall Policy advanced page, showing how outbound access can be blocked.

So, nobody should get confused about whether they need to "disable their firewall" in the sense of allowing external traffic in. That's probably not what you're dealing with. Your's is a case of shooting yourself in the foot with a restrictive firewall (LAN to WAN).

Mark

[timdoc1]

Well I unblocked outboundfor 10000-50000 UDP
That's a ton of ports , but as far as I can tell, there is no knowing whatMJ will choose for the next call.

Funny MJ support has no idea it uses these ports in this range!

[timdoc1]

{/quote}

I just read the manual for the SBG900 (http://www.google.com/url?sa=U&start=7& ... znq2SdZatA). The problem is that it probably blocks external access.

See page 35 (of the PDF, 29 of the printed page) for an example of the Firewall Policy advanced page, showing how outbound access can be blocked.

So, nobody should get confused about whether they need to "disable their firewall" in the sense of allowing external traffic in. That's probably not what you're dealing with. Your's is a case of shooting yourself in the foot with a restrictive firewall (LAN to WAN).

Mark[/quote]

Thanks Mark, that's where I have been opening the ports!

I mad a great MJ phone call just now to a bud, but all outbound ports from 10000 - 30000 are open

REF: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/MagicJack/ ... Background

[az2008]

Well I unblocked outboundfor 10000-50000 UDP
That's a ton of ports , but as far as I can tell, there is no knowing whatMJ will choose for the next call.

Funny MJ support has no idea it uses these ports in this range!

I think it's unusual for people to block outbound ports. If outbound ports are blocked it's like a corporate/business environment. In that case, they know they've blocked extranet access, and should know what's necessary to allow extranet access.

I don't think most routers are configured that way. I had Linksys WRT54GL with Linksys firmware. It wasn't restrictive like that. It only blocked external traffic coming in to the LAN. I flashed it with the more advanced Tomato firmware. Same thing.

But, to your point: I don't know why MJ tells people to open ports coming into their firewall (WAN to LAN). MJ doesn't require this. And, even if it did, it uses *a lot* more ports than just 5060-5070 (and, it doesn't even seem to use 5060-5069).

The whole topic is confusing because of the different meanings of "open ports." And, the buggy routers which may require opening ports from the outside to the inside. And, MJ support's misinformation.

Mark

[timdoc1]

I think it's unusual for people to block outbound ports. If outbound ports are blocked it's like a corporate/business environment. In that case, they know they've blocked extranet access, and should know what's necessary to allow it extranet access.

I don't think most routers are configured that way. I had Linksys WRT54GL with Linksys firmware. It wasn't restrictive like that. It only blocked external traffic coming in to the LAN. I flashed it with the more advanced Tomato firmware. Same thing.

Mark

Thanks for your help Mark. Much appreciated. It's so frustrating that MJ Chat does not know their product to this degree... I told "her" how I could get it to work and she refused to believe me saying like a good robot' "MJ uses only ports 5060, 5070, 80 and 43 or something" It's a bad broken record over there!

[sguardiola]

Well I unblocked outboundfor 10000-50000 UDP
That's a ton of ports , but as far as I can tell, there is no knowing whatMJ will choose for the next call.

Funny MJ support has no idea it uses these ports in this range!

I had to open 10000-50000 UDP for the audio to work for me. I just bought MJ yesterday and could not get it to work right. The audio would work sometimes (one way only). Only once did both ways work. As soon as I opened the ports 10000-50000 UDP I was able to get audio both way each and every time. I must have called 20 or more times testing it all connected with audio. Thanks!!!! I was about to take it back thinking it was a defective unit. By the way I have a DIR-615 Dlink Router. Thanks agian!!!

[timdoc1]

Sorry you had to spend much time b4 you stumbled on opening outbound ports on your router like me.
-tim

[mberlant]

Firewalls and routers are two different functions, and you happen to have both in one piece of equipment.

Most SOHO routers do not have a firewall function. They allow all outbound traffic and keep track of what is going out, so that the reply packets can be allowed back in and can be routed to the originating party. Since all incoming packets, including those for an incoming call, are truly replies to your request for service, they all come inbound through your router without the need to open any ports.

Firewalls, whether the kind that is built into your router or the kind that comes with Windows XP, are tasked with managing outbound traffic, as well. In your case, you have discovered that you must give permission for the MJ client to do its thing. This means granting outbound permission for ports 5060 (UDP), 5070 (UDP), 80 (already done for browsing), 443 (already done for secure browsing) and 16384-16482 (UDP). The last range of ports should be enough for MJ to choose amongst for handling the voice component of a conversation, but you may need more if the MJ softphone has trouble with this part of the SIP protocol.

[az2008]

This means granting outbound permission for ports ... and 16384-16482 (UDP). The last range of ports should be enough for MJ to choose amongst for handling the voice component of a conversation,

I still don't understand your choice of ports for the RTP/vms connection. I just tried blocking all outbound access with Tomato, and allowing only UDP 16384-16482 destination ports.

It didn't work. I changed it to source ports. That didn't work either.

The softphone connects to a UDP destination port in the range of 10000-30000. The source port is in the range of 40000-60000.

In the past you've suggested that MJ will negotiate the 98 open ports. But, I had to allow outbound access to the full range of destination ports (20,000 ports).

Mark

[mberlant]

I am sorry that I missed your reply to the other thread where you said that you tried the limited range of ports and failed, which is why I put the same port range and the same caveat in this comment.

[az2008]

which is why I put the same port range and the same caveat in this comment.

What I'm getting at is: under what circumstances would anyone see the softphone connect to only one of 98 destination ports? Everything I'm seeing is that it connects to a port in the full range of 20,000 ports (10000-30000).

It seems to me like the default suggestion would be that anyone blocking access to the internet would have to open that full range, and the "caveat" would be that they might be able to open only 98 ports, but nobody seems to have confirmed that the softphone will work that way.

Mark

[mberlant]

The comment was that, according to the SIP protocol, the client is supposed to negotiate the desired RTP port with the other side during call setup. This is supposed to include a test of whether the desired forward port is usable. If all is in order, the client should discover the range of ports available and choose from amongst them.

The caveat I repeated is that I did not know until your most recent post that the MJ softphone does not perform this test, but rather chooses a port without regard for whether it is viable.

[az2008]

The caveat I repeated is that I did not know until your most recent post that the MJ softphone does not perform this test, but rather chooses a port without regard for whether it is viable.

Ok, thanks. Someone else may want to confirm my results. But, it looks to me like the softphone is told which port to connect on (via the SIP connection to dest UDP port 5070). And, it just connects to it. It didn't look to me like the softphone tries ports until it finds one.

Mark

[timdoc1]

YES, THERE IS A "FIREWALL" TAB FOR MY ROUTER/MODEM/FIREWALL. These are the additions that I found necessary for MJ

IB OB

majicjack1 5060:5060 UDP/TCP Yes Yes

majicjack2 5070:5070 UDP/TCP Yes Yes

majicjack3 10000:50000 UDP No Yes

Glad nobody has my IP address, heh?

This is/was a popular modem from a popular company and I am pretty sure that more and more companies will be integrating firewalls into there router/modems, so MJ needs to step up to the plate, get a clue, and support us.

-Tim

[az2008]

This is/was a popular modem from a popular company and I am pretty sure that more and more companies will be integrating firewalls into there router/modems, so MJ needs to step up to the plate, get a clue, and support us.

All routers are firewalls. Just because a router has a feature to block internal-to-external access doesn't exclusively make it a firewall. Stateful packet inspection (to block external-to-internal access) is considered a firewall too.

Your router sounds like a Motorola Surf modem which has a "so easy, a caveman can do it" feature for protection ("Low, medium, high"). If you choose "High" it disables access to the external network.

IMO, it's extremely unusual for individuals to restrict access *to* the internet. If someone chooses to do that, they bear the responsibility of understanding their access requirements. If a router makes it easy to block access, it should make it easy to see what's being blocked so the user can resolve problems.

Maybe MJ could make this easier. For example, make the RTP traffic connect to just one port (where a listener accepts connections and hands them off to forked children, like common FTP, HTTP, et. al. servers do).

Tunneling through http (and proxy support) would be nice too.

Mark