Recent posts

[25.7.11_2]

#91

26.1 Series / Re: MiniUPNPD

Last post by Kewin - January 27, 2026, 09:48:45 AM

Just to chime in since I guess not that many are using miniupnpd.. I'm still running 25.7.11_2 and I use UPnP for consoles and kids' gaming, and I'm not seeing those errors in my log..

(A lot of other errors, but I'm guessing it's because the clients didn't clear their active mappings before shutting off)..

Code Select Expand

2026-01-27T09:23:31    Error    miniupnpd    upnpevents_processfds: 0x1239f410080, remove subscriber uuid:4a4dccd4-fb59-11f0-af55-00d0b4023658 after an ERROR cb: http://10.0.10.134:2869/upnp/eventing/dkgqwukrhw
2026-01-27T09:23:31    Warning    miniupnpd    upnp_event_process_notify: connect(10.0.10.134:2869): Operation timed out
2026-01-27T09:23:31    Error    miniupnpd    upnpevents_processfds: 0x1239f410100, remove subscriber uuid:4a487762-fb59-11f0-af55-00d0b4023658 after an ERROR cb: http://10.0.10.134:2869/upnp/eventing/bejxzoycej
2026-01-27T09:23:31    Warning    miniupnpd    upnp_event_process_notify: connect(10.0.10.134:2869): Operation timed out
2026-01-27T09:23:31    Warning    miniupnpd    upnp_event_process_notify: connect(10.0.10.134:2869): Operation timed out
2026-01-27T09:23:15    Warning    miniupnpd    upnp_event_process_notify: connect(10.0.10.134:2869): Operation timed out
2026-01-27T09:23:15    Warning    miniupnpd    upnp_event_process_notify: connect(10.0.10.134:2869): Operation timed out
2026-01-27T09:23:15    Warning    miniupnpd    upnp_event_process_notify: connect(10.0.10.134:2869): Operation timed out
2026-01-27T09:21:25    Warning    miniupnpd    upnp_event_process_notify: connect(10.0.1.153:2869): Operation timed out
2026-01-27T09:07:13    Error    miniupnpd    upnpevents_processfds: 0x1239f410000, remove subscriber uuid:0319bd80-fb57-11f0-af55-00d0b4023658 after an ERROR cb: http://10.0.10.127:2869/upnp/eventing/ujhzqdwdtn
2026-01-27T09:07:13    Warning    miniupnpd    upnp_event_process_notify: connect(10.0.10.127:2869): Operation timed out
2026-01-27T09:07:13    Error    miniupnpd    upnpevents_processfds: 0x1239f410280, remove subscriber uuid:0314bbca-fb57-11f0-af55-00d0b4023658 after an ERROR cb: http://10.0.10.127:2869/upnp/eventing/ocsmvlvmza

/Kewin

#92

Hardware and Performance / Re: SFP+ to RJ45 slow WAN spe...

Last post by meyergru - January 27, 2026, 09:36:29 AM

That is an 10G Base-SR type SFP+ transceiver, which is way less power-consuming than RJ45 ones. For DAC cables, you do not even get a temp reading, because they are the least power hungry of the three types.

#93

26.1 Series / Re: New rule system

Last post by tessus - January 27, 2026, 09:23:39 AM

I'm not familiar with other platforms but in OPNsense (at least) DNAT allows to translate both the destination host and/or the destination port.  Both functions in one.

Well, port forwarding is a subset of DNAT functionality (1:1 static translation w/o hairpinning plus port translation), maybe that's why it is renamed and then there will be additional or less options in the interface. I guess I will see. ;-)

n versions prior to 26.1, you can check the NAT rule itself.  IIRC, there were three options.  I don't remember their exact names but essentially one was to do nothing, one was to create an auto pass (without an associated rule), and one was to create an associated rule on the interface

Awesome, thanks. I checked my rules and all have the Filter rule association set to None. So I should be good.

#94

26.1 Series / Re: New rule system

Last post by OPNenthu - January 27, 2026, 09:10:52 AM

Port forwarding is not the same as DNAT.

I'm not familiar with other platforms but in OPNsense (at least) DNAT allows to translate both the destination host and/or the destination port.  Both functions in one.

I don't think I have NAT association rules on my interfaces. Afaik I always created rules manually.
Is there a way to find out?

In versions prior to 26.1, you can check the NAT rule itself.  IIRC, there were three options.  I don't remember their exact names but essentially one was to do nothing, one was to create an auto pass (without an associated rule), and one was to create an associated rule on the interface.

#95

26.1 Series / Re: New rule system

Last post by tessus - January 27, 2026, 09:00:22 AM

This was discussed in another thread too.

This is a bit strange though. Port forwarding is not the same as DNAT. It's true that DNAT is often used in combination with port forwarding, but that doesn't mean that port forwarding rules should be renamed to DNAT. Hmm, this is rather concerning.

If you have existing NAT association rules on your interfaces

I don't think I have NAT association rules on my interfaces. Afaik I always created rules manually.
Is there a way to find out?

#96

26.1 Series / Re: Upgrade to RC1 successful

Last post by Patrick M. Hausen - January 27, 2026, 08:54:46 AM

Maybe "Allow manual adjustment of DHCPv6 and Router Advertisements" was used on those LANs (also a bit earlier in time) which has led to several code problems over the years.

If you have the time in the middle of a major release progressing, could you elaborate on that? This is my default setup literally everywhere.

TIA
Patrick

#97

26.1 Series / Re: Upgrade to RC1 successful

Last post by OPNenthu - January 27, 2026, 08:52:54 AM

Maybe "Allow manual adjustment of DHCPv6 and Router Advertisements" was used on those LANs (also a bit earlier in time) which has led to several code problems over the years.

Indeed, it was used in the past.  I maybe even had it checked with Dnsmasq acting as the RA daemon, but the radvd service on all the interfaces was disabled.  I wasn't aware that after migration from ISC->Dnsmasq that I needed to also uncheck this option.

Still unclear why only those two interfaces in the screenshot showed up in the radvd service and were enabled, when I had several other interfaces configured identically.

I took a snapshot prior to the upgrades so I can roll back and try to reproduce... if that's helpful?  I could also save a copy of my config from that version.

Did you remove it from the GUI or via command line?

I uninstalled it from the GUI.

#98

25.7, 25.10 Series / Re: Dnsmasq logging configurat...

Last post by franco - January 27, 2026, 08:51:36 AM

It's queued up for a soon-to-be (but non-critical) hotfix in 25.7.11 (when we also add the upgrade path to 26.1).


Cheers,
Franco

#99

26.1 Series / Re: 26.1.rc1 -> 26.1 rc2 ........

Last post by franco - January 27, 2026, 08:40:30 AM

ok, nice, thanks for the feedback :)

#100

26.1 Series / Re: MiniUPNPD

Last post by franco - January 27, 2026, 08:40:10 AM

I'm still missing the point a bit: it was said it's broken because it's spamming. The question is: is it still working after upgrading from 25.7.11 (where it worked) to 26.1-RCx (in which the code really doesn't differ)?


Cheers,
Franco