No, I am not doing FTP syncronization.
By default, SQL Server listens on port 1433 for traffic.
It can be changed. The main thing is your client and
server must match on what port is being used.
We discussed changing it when the problem first arose, but
other issues arise with that. One thing, is there is
nothing to say, an ISP won't block another port.
Now, Hillary mention ports above 1500-2000 are not
blocked. Is there any info out in the world that may
support this. We'd hate to go through the work of
changing this just to find out, it will be blocked just
the same, or even worse, some ISPs may block some port
like this and not 1433. An example is AOL has never
blocked 1433 (cross my fingers and many of our clients use
this). Without contacting AOL, I wouldn't know what they
may be doing with the 1500-2000 range. Again any
supporting documentation would be needed for us to justify
making this kind of a change.
Doug
[quoted text, click to view] >-----Original Message-----
>Is the Server setup for FTP synchronization? if so, that
>uses port 21. I was not aware that port 1433 needed to be
>open also. I could be wrong since I am trying to setup
>the same type of scenario but I have yet to get that far.
>It would be good to know if that is necessary, since my
>firewall does indeed block that port from the outside
>world.
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>most ports above 1500-2000 are not blocked.
>>
>>"Doug" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>message
>>news:0bf101c3a477$1c44cbc0$a501280a@phx.gbl...
>>> We are using Replication with SQL 2000 SP3 on server
>and
>>> MSDE SP3 on clients.
>>>
>>> The clients are using an Internet connection. The
>process
>>> is working, except when ISPs have blocked port 1433.
>>>
>>> There's been discussions about changing the port SQL is
>>> listening on, but we do not want to go change from the
>>> default, plus there is no guarantee the ISPs won't also
>>> block that port.
>>>
>>> Just want to check other's experience. Is there any
>other
>>> way with an Internet connection to allow the client and
>>> server to communicate and not be at the mercy of the
>ISPs
>>> blocking ports? I can't think of any, but maybe some
>of
>>> you have some experience or alternatives. I'm just
>>> concerned when another virus comes out, the ISPs first
>>> reaction will be to block ports again.
>>>
>>> TIA,
>>>
>>> Doug
>>
>>
>>.
>>
>.
