Problem with port info disappearing

[Pappy]

I've been having an ongoing problem with my firewall port rules for port forwarding disappearing (for Norton IS 2014 firewall - my router firewall no problem). It's sporadic. After inputting port info in the Program Rules and saving etc it might go for days or a week or two before they all disappear (I think 4 ports for Links 2003). For some reason the 16000 UDP for Gameranger does NOT disappear just the Links ports. Norton didn't figure it out (worked with them for about a week) so I was wondering if anyone here has experienced this or may know what may be causing it. I thought maybe not having a static IP might have done it and in fact it did go for a few weeks until a few days ago when I couldn't connect on Gameranger and lo and behold I looked and port info gone. I have Vista64. Don't know if this has anything to do with it but I've always had 1 bar on Trust for both Links and Gameranger. Also can I go play on Gameranger without setting port forwarding up (doesn't hurt to ask ) as this can get old. I can do this in my sleep now. Anyway don't anyone lose sleep over this - I'm not. I just play a game or two on the LSPN games. Thanks all.

[MimicPS]

Hi Pete,

First of all some good news for you... you can absolutely use Gameranger without needing to open any ports at all - it emulates the ports for it all, even including the 16000 Plug-n-Play port.

As far as what is happening with Norton, it sounds very odd indeed. I wonder if Norton is removing the exceptions if they are not specifically pointing at a target? The way that static IP should be working is that, using Portforward.com's tool for simplicity, you would choose a specific internal IP (range starting 192.168.XXX.XXX) to set as static on your computer, which would be the point to which all traffic using the rules you set up would eventually end up at, and then create the rules on your router specifying that internal IP address as the target for each of the port forward rules you wish to set up. I'd be interested to know if you are using a router, and if you are setting up port forwarding rules in there.

Then, Norton's role is to monitor the incoming traffic and make sure it complies with the Program Rules you set up. So far as setting up your program rules, from what I have seen from Norton's online forums, they advise that in most cases, using the settings as they are in Norton Security is as much as you need to keep safe. Could it be that between Norton's standard set-up, and your custom created rules, the software is becoming confused - sort of a binary-switch operation where one says open to traffic, and one says close to traffic. Also, if there is already Program Rules that match the particular rules you set up in Norton, could it perhaps be deciding to drop what it sees as a redundant rule?

That said, unless you want to play LSPN rounds online as a multiplayer game, you have no need for them, so perhaps you can simply decide to use Gameranger for your online multiplayer fix. The LinksTour should work just fine either online or offline as a single player without any ports being allocated.

[Pappy]

First of all some good news for you... you can absolutely use Gameranger without needing to open any ports at all - it emulates the ports for it all, even including the 16000 Plug-n-Play port.

What's involved to do that? Don't think you mentioned that below unless I missed it. I tried to play on GR a few days ago and couldn't connect because I lost the port forwarding info in Norton firewall (which was there a day or two before - I don't check every day but almost everyday).

...unless you want to play LSPN rounds online as a multiplayer game, you have no need for them, so perhaps you can simply decide to use Gameranger for your online multiplayer fix. The LinksTour should work just fine either online or offline as a single player without any ports being allocated.

I don't play on LSPN site as far as live goes just the scheduled weekly games etc. I used to play a lot on GR but for some reason I've been having problems with this maybe since "upgrading" from Norton IS 2012 to 2014 (don't know why I did that but, oh well, too late now - maybe set it up wrong somewhere but where? Like I said I had no problems with the 2012 version)

I wonder if Norton is removing the exceptions if they are not specifically pointing at a target? The way that static IP should be working is that, using Portforward.com's tool for simplicity, you would choose a specific internal IP (range starting 192.168.XXX.XXX) to set as static on your computer, which would be the point to which all traffic using the rules you set up would eventually end up at, and then create the rules on your router specifying that internal IP address as the target for each of the port forward rules you wish to set up.

I do have a static IP address that is in the DHCP range and when I check in the command window it does show up as a static IP address. As far as I know there's nowhere in the firewall where I set up the program rules for port forwarding to input the static IP. As its set for my computer it should OK - correct me if I'm wrong on that.

I'd be interested to know if you are using a router, and if you are setting up port forwarding rules in there. Then, Norton's role is to monitor the incoming traffic and make sure it complies with the Program Rules you set up. So far as setting up your program rules, from what I have seen from Norton's online forums, they advise that in most cases, using the settings as they are in Norton Security is as much as you need to keep safe. Could it be that between Norton's standard set-up, and your custom created rules, the software is becoming confused - sort of a binary-switch operation where one says open to traffic, and one says close to traffic. Also, if there is already Program Rules that match the particular rules you set up in Norton, could it perhaps be deciding to drop what it sees as a redundant rule

Yes I am using a router with port forwarding rules set up there (3600HGV). So I have both hardware and software firewall's set up with port forwarding but like I said with the Norton IS 2012 never had that problem. I really don't like the idea of disabling the portforwarding in the router and if I disable the Norton portforwarding I definitely won't be connecting with anyone on GR. It's not a matter of still being safe but being able to connect. You kinda lost me in the highlighted above.

Hope all this makes sense Mimic. Thanks for your help.