Remote Assistance Vista 64-bit - probable firewall/router issues

I have been unable to get a Remote Assistance invitation through a
firewall/router to a destination machine. I opened ports 135 and legacy 3389
so that those ports are directed to the system, but alas, nothing. I also
put the computer into the DMZ on the router and still no luck.

I checked the software firewalls, and I remote assistance was enabled as an
exception. To back that up read the next paragraph.

However, if I use Remote Desktop to reach another computer on the same
network (behind the firewalls), and use the SAME invitation file, the remote
assistance connection works great.

I opened the invitation with notepad, and I found this looking rather correct:

RCTICKET="65538,1,192.168.10.34:64931;9X.23X.1XX.X X7:15525,*

I modified the actual IP address by replacing some characters with X.
However, the internal address looks fine. Is that port 15525 that it is
coming in on? Does remote assistance take some additional port handling I am
not accounting for?

Can you telnet port 3389 using public ip?

--
Bob Lin, MS-MVP, MCSE & CNE
Networking, Internet, Routing, VPN Troubleshooting on
http://www.ChicagoTech.net
How to Setup Windows, Network, VPN & Remote Access on
http://www.HowToNetworking.com
"Larry Heimendinger" <> wrote in
message news:5B48573E-FAD2-45F4-9714-...
>I have been unable to get a Remote Assistance invitation through a
> firewall/router to a destination machine. I opened ports 135 and legacy
> 3389
> so that those ports are directed to the system, but alas, nothing. I also
> put the computer into the DMZ on the router and still no luck.
>
> I checked the software firewalls, and I remote assistance was enabled as
> an
> exception. To back that up read the next paragraph.
>
> However, if I use Remote Desktop to reach another computer on the same
> network (behind the firewalls), and use the SAME invitation file, the
> remote
> assistance connection works great.
>
> I opened the invitation with notepad, and I found this looking rather
> correct:
>
> RCTICKET="65538,1,192.168.10.34:64931;9X.23X.1XX.X X7:15525,*
>
> I modified the actual IP address by replacing some characters with X.
> However, the internal address looks fine. Is that port 15525 that it is
> coming in on? Does remote assistance take some additional port handling I
> am
> not accounting for?

the answer is yes, and I just solved the problem. It was that the
invitations were being sent as Vista only, and by luck of the draw the remote
machines were Windows 7 Beta and Windows 2008 respectively. When it worked
inside, it was from a Vista machine. Now it works from the outside.

Thanks.

"Robert L. (MS-MVP)" wrote:

> Can you telnet port 3389 using public ip?
>
> --
> Bob Lin, MS-MVP, MCSE & CNE
> Networking, Internet, Routing, VPN Troubleshooting on
> http://www.ChicagoTech.net
> How to Setup Windows, Network, VPN & Remote Access on
> http://www.HowToNetworking.com
> "Larry Heimendinger" <> wrote in
> message news:5B48573E-FAD2-45F4-9714-...
> >I have been unable to get a Remote Assistance invitation through a
> > firewall/router to a destination machine. I opened ports 135 and legacy
> > 3389
> > so that those ports are directed to the system, but alas, nothing. I also
> > put the computer into the DMZ on the router and still no luck.
> >
> > I checked the software firewalls, and I remote assistance was enabled as
> > an
> > exception. To back that up read the next paragraph.
> >
> > However, if I use Remote Desktop to reach another computer on the same
> > network (behind the firewalls), and use the SAME invitation file, the
> > remote
> > assistance connection works great.
> >
> > I opened the invitation with notepad, and I found this looking rather
> > correct:
> >
> > RCTICKET="65538,1,192.168.10.34:64931;9X.23X.1XX.X X7:15525,*
> >
> > I modified the actual IP address by replacing some characters with X.
> > However, the internal address looks fine. Is that port 15525 that it is
> > coming in on? Does remote assistance take some additional port handling I
> > am
> > not accounting for?
>
>