Attempting to Setup Servers Behind Router (no luck)

[TehUser]

That's interesting, because I also have Qwest and I've never seen any sort of port restriction.

[Eric]

I have Qwest as my ISP, and unless you get their business package (nazis that they are), you can't get port 80, 25, 21, or other similar service ports in from external addresses. 

Don't feel bad: almost all ISP's are doing that now.  Frontier's been doing SMTP (port 25) blocking for months now.

[rabbit]

I considered stuff like that, and I was running Apache off port 8080 for a while, and it worked in-network, but not externally.  I'll try pluggin in the server sometime when the laptop isn't in use, and Windows is updated all the way.

[nslay]

I only have 1 router T.T
Notice the detailed diagram and ph33r my network:


I have Verizon DSL, and AFAIK they don't care about running servers.

Yes, but your router's WAN IP is a private IP, which means whatever its connected to is a NAT too...which means you need to have ports forwarded from that router too.
Do you live in an apartment that provides internet?  Some of these cheap apartment complexes have a single cable or DSL modem and use a router that does NAT (otherwise it'd be impossible to share the public IP)
The problem is clear, your router is behind a NAT too. (the WAN IP was 192.168.1.47 or something like that?)

[Joe[x86]]

By the drawing, I'd say he lives in a house. =p

But yeah, 127.x.x.x, 10.x.x.x, and 192.x.x.x is reserved to LAN. Your router's WAN address is set to 192.168.1.47, which means that any box would try to access that IP on their LAN, and end up either (probably) getting a "no route to host" or whatever error because that box doesn't exist. I don't know how you got assigned that IP address, having your router set up for dynamic IP (or was it set to static?), but thats your problem.

[nslay]

By the drawing, I'd say he lives in a house. =p

But yeah, 127.x.x.x, 10.x.x.x, and 192.x.x.x is reserved to LAN. Your router's WAN address is set to 192.168.1.47, which means that any box would try to access that IP on their LAN, and end up either (probably) getting a "no route to host" or whatever error because that box doesn't exist. I don't know how you got assigned that IP address, having your router set up for dynamic IP (or was it set to static?), but thats your problem.

Yes, which means his router is behind another NAT router...he's not aware of that it seems.  In order to remedy this problem, he must get the NAT router his router is behind to forward the ports to his router (and then his router forwards the ports to his computer).

[iago]

By the drawing, I'd say he lives in a house. =p

But yeah, 127.x.x.x, 10.x.x.x, and 192.x.x.x is reserved to LAN. Your router's WAN address is set to 192.168.1.47, which means that any box would try to access that IP on their LAN, and end up either (probably) getting a "no route to host" or whatever error because that box doesn't exist. I don't know how you got assigned that IP address, having your router set up for dynamic IP (or was it set to static?), but thats your problem.

To be picky, it's not 192.x.x.x.  The mask is 16-bit, so it's 192.168.x.x. 

From RFC 1918:

10.0.0.0        -   10.255.255.255  (10/8 prefix)
     172.16.0.0      -   172.31.255.255  (172.16/12 prefix)
     192.168.0.0     -   192.168.255.255 (192.168/16 prefix)

   We will refer to the first block as "24-bit block", the second as
   "20-bit block", and to the third as "16-bit" block. Note that (in
   pre-CIDR notation) the first block is nothing but a single class A
   network number, while the second block is a set of 16 contiguous
   class B network numbers, and third block is a set of 256 contiguous
   class C network numbers.

And nslay is almost certainly right.  I await RaBBiT's response to him.