I have my M+ base setup, I am getting NTRIP updates from the state department of transportation, and my M+ rover is getting a FIX solution via my cellular wifi hotspot. What I cannot find is how to configure my router to let me access the base’s ReachView web page using my WAN IP.
If you do that, then you and anyone else on the Internet will be able to access ReachView on your base. That is a security concern. Logfiles, settings, etc. all could be changed by anyone who finds your IP and port number.
Does your router have a method of port-forwarding? That would still be safer than setting up Reach as the DMZ.
1 Like
I made no reference to using the DMZ, I never have used the DMZ feature for any project and never would. While I would not consider my base’s data valuable in any way, I always make it a point to use good security habits. My router does have port forwarding, that is how my rover is getting its RTK corrections from my base. What I am looking for is the proper port to forward to access ReachView in my base.
Sorry, I wasn’t trying to suggest you were going to do that, just that those are the two ways I know of to accomplish what you want to do.
Anyhow, you can start with port 80, as that is the default HTTP port.
2 Likes
Ok, I figured it out. I set port forwarding to use a public port that is easy for me to remember and a private port of 80. By doing this I can enter http://my_wan_ip:my_public_port/ and ReachView comes up. Now I can easily check on my base from anywhere.
1 Like
OK if someone finds the hole in your firewall and messes with your base settings, let us know. I’d be curious to know how long that takes / or if anyone even bothers with it.
1 Like
Via any free ip / port scanner.
Curious how you set port 80 as “private”? Normally port 80 is the default HTTP port. If someone has the WAN IP they’re in.
What he meant was that ReachView is served on port 80 on a private LAN IP, and the router forwards that to some other port number on its public WAN IP.
Picking a random port number gives a little bit of ‘security by obscurity’, but not much.
Got it, that makes much more sense.
This topic was automatically closed 100 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.