Close

Remote access vs Internal access

Having trouble with Sighthound Video? Post here for help.

Moderator: Staff

no avatar
dwRCjCCil
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 11:50 pm

Remote access vs Internal access

by dwRCjCCil » Sun Jul 03, 2016 12:09 am

I have port forwarding enabled and have no problem accessing the camera (Foscam) thru the Android app on my phone using my external IP and the specified port, when on cellular data, but when connected to my home network wi-fi, but after starting the camera just stays at 'loading' and the camera never loads in the app. If I disable wifi on my phone, the app (Android running on Nexus 6P) loads and is accessible. If instead of the external IP /port, I substitute the internal IP + (same) port of the computer running the Sighthound software , it functions normally. Is there any setting change I can make to eliminate this problem?
Thanks for your thoughts and suggestions.

no avatar
zxcslo
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 12:48 pm

Re: Remote access vs Internal access

by zxcslo » Sun Jul 03, 2016 3:05 am

Your router doesn't support or is not configured for loopback (I think is the right term).
Not all routers support access to your local network over the internet/wan from your local network (home).

no avatar
dwRCjCCil
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 11:50 pm

Re: Remote access vs Internal access

by dwRCjCCil » Sun Jul 03, 2016 1:59 pm

Thank you for the suggestion. I've not run into this with other applications with port forwarding enabled. I'm kind of stuck with my router, as it's a Uverse gateway and provides both TV and Internet. Without buying another router to do pass through, guess I've got what I've got. I will look into it, but don't recall seeing that in the router configuration.

no avatar
dwRCjCCil
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 11:50 pm

Re: Remote access vs Internal access

by dwRCjCCil » Sun Jul 03, 2016 2:09 pm

I looked into my router's (NVG589) capabilities on the ATT forum and you are correct that it does not have loopback capabilities.

no avatar
markn62
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2015 12:19 pm

Re: Remote access vs Internal access

by markn62 » Mon Dec 05, 2016 5:02 pm

I port forward Sighthound along with many other services. I use PfSense, a commercial router, with the Pure NAT feature and Reflections enabled. They all work fine as does Sighthound's video streams (CAMERAS). In CLIPS the thumbnails load but choosing any of them fails after about 30 seconds of spinning to show a play icon with an "X" through it. Even if I VPN into my LAN where the cameras exist it behaves the same since I'm still routing through AT&T cellular. Once home on WiFi, using either VPN and non-VPN, the clips play fine. Seems AT&T is the common denominator. Any suggestions how to remote into the clips via AT&T?

no avatar
markn62
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2015 12:19 pm

Re: Remote access vs Internal access

by markn62 » Sat Jun 22, 2019 7:03 pm

Turns out AT&T was filtering OpenVpn port. I reassigned to a non-standard port and all works well. For those using port forward for remote access but have no access on local wifi here is another way to do it. Use dynu.net or other dns host to translate your router's Wan ip to a host name. Then in your router, if it's capable, do a custom dsnmasq to point the host name to the SH server's private IP. In this way your client app will have access to SH both remotely (cellular) and on your local WiFi.


Return to Technical Support