Ports 21 and 22 are open but the rest are not.

[astronovaval]

Ports 21 and 22 are open just fine. I add ports 28015, 28016 and 28083 along side 21 and 22 but the 280XX arent opening, this is for setting up a Rust Dedicated Game Server.

[KeithFrench · Accepted solution]

Hi @astronovaval 

Having analysed two more traces from you, the problem is still the same. Your firewall setup in Linux is wrong.

[KeithFrench]

If it doesn't work get me a Wireshark trace on the game server. If the PC that you are trying to connect from is the Windows one, download Wireshark from:-

https://www.wireshark.org/ 

Then start a trace running on the Windows PC & another on the game server. When both are running try & connect to its local IP address.

[astronovaval]

it just doesnt work in the slightest, i think i have fixed it for now though by changing something in the server cfg. ill let you know how it goes after fully testing

[KeithFrench]

I have said before, if you try to connect to the game server from another device on your local network via the router's WAN IP address this will not work. The router, seeing the packet coming back in from the internet, classes it as NAT Loopback and blocks it.

What problem do you get when you try to connect to its 192.168.1.10 address?

[astronovaval]

new issue has arrived.. anyone on a different network than me can join the server but i cannot.. ive tried joining through my public ipv4 and through the machines internal ip. hwen i try connect via publicipv4:28015 it says found 1 server query results, then says connection attempt failed. 

[astronovaval]

seems to be fixed!

My server is now listed. Thank you so much.

going to do some more testing then ill come back here with the results.

[KeithFrench]

Sorry I forgot to say there is nothing showing in your trace for UDP port 28013.

[astronovaval]

alright, thank you for your help so far.

[KeithFrench]

Thanks for the trace. UDP port 28017 is unable to connect to this port in your linux PC. Your firewall is the only thing in between them, it must be blocked there.

I have run out of time for today now.

[astronovaval]

by the way the port thats replacing 28015 is 28013, so instead of 28015 showing up, it will most likely be 28013

[astronovaval]

here, you can edit this and remove the link once you see it:

EDIT - Link removed

[astronovaval]

alright 

[KeithFrench]

Start WS trace, try to connect to the UDP port, however, you are doing it. You did it in the other trace for 28015.

[astronovaval]

im unsure to what you mean by "Wireshark trace of that attempted UDP port connection." sorry

[KeithFrench]

You'd need to stretch the width out so as each line is only on one line and I need the relevant Wireshark trace of that attempted UDP port connection.

[astronovaval]

hope this is what you mean

[KeithFrench]

Those ss columns are all about queues and byte transfer from the port to the application:-

1. Recv-Q: This shows the total number of bytes not copied by the program connected to the specific socket.
2. Send-Q: The count of bytes that is not ACK by the remote host.

It would be useful to see screenshots of the output in future as simple copy & paste destroys all formatting, making them very difficult to read.

[astronovaval]

i was going to test 28013 and 28014 individually, but since 28013 made no difference, i really doubt 28014 will either so im just going to opt out on trying it. 28017 should not be used by anything currently.

[KeithFrench]

 The only UDP ports available for incoming connections are 28013 & 28017, I thought that you were changing to 28013 & 28014? Without a matching Wireshark trace, I can only assume your firewall is the culprit again. If you want to get me another trace....

[astronovaval]

udp UNCONN 0 0 0.0.0.0:28013 0.0.0.0:* users:(("RustDedicated",pid=12298,fd=51))
udp UNCONN 0 0 0.0.0.0:28017 0.0.0.0:* users:(("RustDedicated",pid=12298,fd=38))

tcp LISTEN 0 100 0.0.0.0:28016 0.0.0.0:* users:(("RustDedicated",pid=12298,fd=24))
tcp LISTEN 0 100 0.0.0.0:28083 0.0.0.0:* users:(("RustDedicated",pid=12298,fd=68))

not sure what im looking for here but the one thing im noticing is the 3rd and 4th argument (Receive & Send) - for UDP its saying 0, for TCP its saying 100