Need extra help installing your Ooma Hub or Telo system? Let us know.
#78969 by vicw
Sun Apr 10, 2011 11:47 am
tomcat wrote:Try assigning your router a static IP then put that IP into the telo's DMZ (on the advanced page of the telo). That should pass all unsolicited traffic to your router.

You can access the telo's setup page by going to http://setup.ooma.com or http://172.27.35.1.


Thanks tomcat. Since I now have the Synology system properly reporting the External IP address changes to DynDNS, I've been trying that, including the correct network DNS addresses. I discovered today that I can communicate with my cameras, Synology systems and alarm system if I use my Verizon cellular connection, but not when I try to access them via the router, using either the network address or the name. I guess I'm 50% successful at this point.

I don't know if that is really a change from the previous condition, or not, but it's fascinating to me, and I'm trying to make sense of it all. I seem to be able to communicate normally with other remote sites through the router, so it appears the problem with the local devices may have something to do with the porting. I just installed and ran PFPort Checker on all of the assigned ports and they all showed that the app was able to make connection with the port device, but that the data it sent didn't arrive at my computer in time. I think I'll go back and see how that test behaves with the Telo behind the router, mainly to see if the information is of any value in troubleshooting.

Update: I got the same result on my ports using the PFPort Checker with the Telo behind the router, except that it said that it couldn't Ping the router, which raises the question - does the Telo allow and respond to pings from the network? It appears it does based on the test results. That's one good reason to consider keeping it behind the router, to avoid scanners and such. I'm surprised at that one. Aside from that the test results didn't demonstrate a difference between the configurations, so it won't help me much.
#78970 by thunderbird
Sun Apr 10, 2011 12:46 pm
vicw:
For your kind of setup I've never heard of a fully successful setup, other than with the Ooma device connected behind of the router. Reason: Some people have partal success, but Ooma doesn't support "loop back" for certain ports.

Ooma connected behind the router:
With your Ooma device connected behind you router, reserve a static IP address for the the Ooma device in your router, this will be the http://xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx number that you will type into your computer's browser window, to access your Ooma Setup pages, when you finish the procedure below.

Temporarily connect a network cable from your computer's wired LAN port to the Ooma devies' "Home' port.
Type in http://172.27.35.1. The Ooma Setup window opens. Click on "Advanced" in the left hand side of window. Go down to "Port Forwarding" and click on "Add New Rule". At "Start Point" enter 80. AT "Type" make sure you see "TCP". In "Forward To IP Address:" type in 172.27.35.1. Click on "Add Rule". Reboot Ooma device.

With a computer connected to one of your router LAN ports, type in the static IP address that you have assigned to the Ooma device from you router. The Ooma Setup pages open.

Now your DNS should function as before you purchansed Ooma, and you will be able to access Ooma setup pages, using a computer connected to your router.
#78972 by vicw
Sun Apr 10, 2011 1:07 pm
Thanks for that. I had picked up your instructions earlier from another thread, and everything is OK with the behind the router setup. We're back in that setup now. I agree there has to be some porting deficiency in the Telo that causes the problem with the up front Telo with the complicated array of hardware in my system.

That, plus the security concern raised by discovering that it doesn't block anonymous external pings leaves me to conclude that I will leave it in the behind the router configuration, as long as other problems, especially voice garbling, don't occur.

So far, the voice quality has been excellent, and no other complications.

Thanks for all of your responses.
#78974 by thunderbird
Sun Apr 10, 2011 1:20 pm
vicw wrote:Thanks for that. I had picked up your instructions earlier from another thread, and everything is OK with the behind the router setup. We're back in that setup now. I agree there has to be some porting deficiency in the Telo that causes the problem with the up front Telo with the complicated array of hardware in my system.

That, plus the security concern raised by discovering that it doesn't block anonymous external pings leaves me to conclude that I will leave it in the behind the router configuration, as long as other problems, especially voice garbling, don't occur.

So far, the voice quality has been excellent, and no other complications.

Thanks for all of your responses.


First: If you have voice garbling, the first thing to do is to turn off MAC Address Spoofing in the Ooma device's Ooma Setup pages (Some Modem and Routers will conflict with Ooma using this setting). Use Built-In MAC address instead.

Next: For Ooma connected after the router configuration, set the Downstream and Upstream Quailty of Service setting in your Ooma Setup pages to either Zero or to double you measured Download, Uplaod Internet speeds as measured by http://www.speedtest.net/.

Try the zero settings first because a "bug" fix in the latest Ooma Telo Firmware release was supposed to have fixed this issue, where there were problems even after making the Ooma recommended settings to zero.

In fact I would make those changes now to prevent problems later.
#78978 by vicw
Sun Apr 10, 2011 1:39 pm
Done

I had already set the Built-in MAC address, and just now reset the QOS to 0 base on your advice. We've been fine on voice quality so far. My wife has probably had about 2 hours of phone time in this configuration (prior to this last change) with no audio problems reported, so hopefully we will continue to be fine. I'll be checking frequently to see when the firmware update gets forced down, so I can tell if there are any new issues from that.
#79721 by aeroclown
Mon Apr 18, 2011 6:10 pm
What most people forget is that the telo acts as a NAT. You don't want this to happen if you have it in front of your router, because then you are double nating your network. One important thing you can do is select a static ip address for your router. Edit the telo so that it can only assign one address using its dhcp server. Then set that single address to your DMZ so that it is not Nating traffic going to your router. This way the telo nats and protects itself while bypassing nat for traffic destined to your routers network. This will allow your router to handle operations on your lane such as port forwarding with out issues since the telo effectively acts as a bridge instead of a nat.
#79724 by vicw
Mon Apr 18, 2011 6:33 pm
aeroclown wrote:What most people forget is that the telo acts as a NAT. You don't want this to happen if you have it in front of your router, because then you are double nating your network. One important thing you can do is select a static ip address for your router. Edit the telo so that it can only assign one address using its dhcp server. Then set that single address to your DMZ so that it is not Nating traffic going to your router. This way the telo nats and protects itself while bypassing nat for traffic destined to your routers network. This will allow your router to handle operations on your lane such as port forwarding with out issues since the telo effectively acts as a bridge instead of a nat.


thanks aeroclown. I had actually taken those steps in the process of trying to run my Telo in front of the router. It didn't resolve the underlying problem of external access to my cameras and Synology systems, unfortunately, although I was able to access and control them as long as the device was working through the cellular network, rather than the wifi router, so I considered that I had 50% success.

What made me abandon the effort was the discovery that the Telo doesn't block anonymous Pings, so that any scanner can easily identify my external ID as a valid and live address. That was an unacceptable security tradeoff for me, and I reluctantly went back to the Telo behind the router configuration. I've been running that way for a week or more, and it seems satisfactory so far.

The only complaint I've heard from my wife about Ooma so far is an occasional incidence of echoes. I haven't personally experienced that, but I'm sure she's right. She's on the phone quite a bit more than me, and says that it happens on long calls. I resisted the temptation to suggest that she keep her calls short, as I thought that might be contrary to my continued good health.
#79828 by thunderbird
Wed Apr 20, 2011 10:20 am
vicw:
Many people including me connect their Ooma device behind their router with no problems at all. Some times some small adjustments to the router has to be made if someone has QoS issues.
Last bumped by thunderbird on Wed Apr 20, 2011 10:20 am.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 8 guests