We have CCTV installed on yachts and busses which requires remote access for live viewing.
Our plan was to run the remote access via FusionHub down SpeedFusion to the end devices (HD4)
Main reason for wanting to use FusionHub was been able to have a static IP address while the end device is on the move and constantly changing IP addresses which DyDNS is unable to keep up with.
Not having port forwarding in the FusionHub has made this plan not possible.
We don’t want to have to run another virtual device just for port forwarding!
Best Regards
Hi Jarid
We are currently running on AWS (which was very simple to set up and has been performing great)
Is there any easy way to create “port forwards on the ISP router” while utilising AWS?
I have been reading about using an AWS elastic load balancer. Not sure if it would do the job correctly and did not look very strait forward to set up
Thank you!
Hi, we are working on a preview version of FusionHub with Port Forward, stay tuned.
Please get the preview firmware with Port Forwarding here.
Instructions to upgrade your FusionHub.
You can configure Port Forwarding rules under Network -> Port Forwarding.
I don’t have a “Firmware” Tab on my fusion hub 
I think you are using 6.2.0 build 1250.
Please download latest version of FusionHub (6.2.1 build 1289) and follow the “FusionHub 6.2.0 Upgrade Guide” in the binary package to upgrade your FusionHub to 6.2.1.
If you just want to beta test the Port Fordwarding feature, I suggest you setup a new FusionHub (6.2.1) instead of upgrade the existing one (6.2.0).
Then upgrade it to the preview firmware from “System -> Firmware”
Did anyone succeed with port forwarding?
I’m trying to use the port 162 for SNMP on a client and forward this port via the fusionhub. As server IP I have put the address assigned by the DHCP due to the NATed speedfusion configuration
Target is to have one port per client to reach them all via snmp.
Hi PG,
Your server located behind of remote SpeedFusion peer right?
Not sur what you mean. I’m trying to access via SNMP the BR1 connected to the fusionhub via speedfusion.
Hello,
So essentially then you will create the port forward in FusionHub to forward the necessary ports across the SF tunnel to the private ip of the server behind the BR1.
It is the BR1 itself that I want to reach.
I have put in the config the IP address assigned by the DHCP but no success
We have been using this for a few months not and it has worked perfectly!
Point direct from FusionHub WAN ports to end devices on the LAN, couldn’t be more simple and great!
Hi Paille,
BR1’s snmp server only listen on LAN and WAN IP addresses but not the address assigned by PepVPN.
If you want to forward snmp from FH to BR1, you need to un-check NAT-Mode in PepVPN profile, modify FH’s port forwarding Server from 169.254.131.2 to BR1’s LAN IP address.
Thanks Kenny, now I understand why it didn’t work.
Any plan on changing this behavior in the future release?
Is it a particular case for SNMP that client is not lsitening too this address or in general, the client doesn’t do anything but fusion based on that?
This is particular to SNMP that not listen to address assigned by PepVPN. We have no plan to change this behavior.
Would it be possible to configure an internal reforward on the BR1 to send fusion-ip:161 to lan-ip:161 ?
You cannot port forward traffic incoming from PepVPN. Are there LAN IP address conflict between BR1s so you need to enable PepVPN NAT mode?
Requirements are
to have an easy deployment and no need for compelex reconfiguration of all BR1s (modify the default LAN ip for example)
to have all BR1s have the fusionhub ip as externally visible ip address
to have an easy way to retrieve information not supported today by incontrol (per simcard consumption)
Configuring SNMP on each device with a different port and SNMP via the fusionhub ip address seemed to be a good option
Understood, however there is no way to port forward SNMP request to Balance from NAT-mode PepVPN currently. I will let the team aware this feature request. InControl support for simcard consumption already on the roadmap but will not available in coming Balance firmware 6.2.1.
Another point to note, IP address assigned by NAT-mode PepVPN is not persistence, that means you cannot guarantee BR1 get the same IP address from FusionHub after PepVPN re-connected.
Hi,
Do you have a port forwarding capable version of 6.2.2 for fusionhub?
Thx