Create rules equal to existing ones, the router recognizes them as a default rule Possible bug?

This thread has been locked for further replies. You can start a new thread to share your ideas or ask questions.

Create rules equal to existing ones, the router recognizes them as a default rule Possible bug?

This thread has been locked for further replies. You can start a new thread to share your ideas or ask questions.
Create rules equal to existing ones, the router recognizes them as a default rule Possible bug?
Create rules equal to existing ones, the router recognizes them as a default rule Possible bug?
2023-11-30 11:12:01 - last edited 2023-12-01 14:36:44
Model: ER605 (TL-R605)  
Hardware Version: V2
Firmware Version: 2.1.2 Build 20230210 Rel.62992

Something strange happened.   

 

In Service Type List, I added DNS ports to block and ensure that everything goes through DNS Proxy Doh  

 

I didn't realize that this Service Type already existed and I created the rule.  

 

I believe the system should prevent me from creating this rule. Now I can't delete it. 

 

Can I delete it somehow or is it just left?

 

  0      
  0      
#1
Options
1 Accepted Solution
Re:Possible bug?-Solution
2023-12-01 14:36:35 - last edited 2023-12-01 14:48:22

  @Clive_A 

 

Problem fixed

 

Hardware Version: ER605 v2.0 firmware 2.2.2 Build 20231017 Rel.68869

 

I created the same rules again and the same problem didn't happen

 

Hardware Version: ER605 v2.0 firmware 2.2.2 Build 20231017 Rel.68869 

 

Enable https and then update as stated in this topic https://community.tp-link.com/en/business/forum/topic/634316

Recommended Solution
  1  
  1  
#8
Options
7 Reply
Re:Possible bug?
2023-11-30 19:30:43 - last edited 2023-12-01 02:55:25

  @Fausto879 

 

it's been a while since I used the router in stand alone, but I mean to remember that you have to remove rules that this service is in use before you can delete it

look at the acl rules to see if it is in use there.

  1  
  1  
#2
Options
Re:Possible bug?
2023-12-01 01:54:42

Hi @Fausto879 

Thanks for posting in our business forum.

Remove the Service Type in the ACL and it allows you to delete it.

I would appreciate it if you didn't mention it as a bug before you have some concrete results or dialectic steps.

 

Looks like you like spam the word bug and this is not a good choice to pick this word. Hope you can consider your description next time.

Best Regards! If you are new to the forum, please read: Howto - A Guide to Use Forum Effectively. Read Before You Post. Look for a model? Search your model NOW Official and Beta firmware. NEW features! Subscribe for the latest update!Download Beta Here☚ ☛ ★ Configuration Guide ★ ☚ ☛ ★ Knowledge Base ★ ☚ ☛ ★ Troubleshooting ★ ☚ ● Be kind and nice. ● Stay on the topic. ● Post details. ● Search first. ● Please don't take it for granted. ● No email confidentiality should be violated. ● S/N, MAC, and your true public IP should be mosaiced.
  0  
  0  
#3
Options
Re:Possible bug?
2023-12-01 02:52:46

  @Clive_A 

 

There is nothing using this rule, even if it existed it would have a darker color, notice that it is grayed out, this means that the router recognizes it as a default rule for the equipment.

 

If you can, do the test, create a new rule equal to any one on the list, you will not receive notice of the existence of this rule and it will be grayed out, with this lighter color.

 

See that there is rule number 6 Dns and number 13 UDP_BLOCK I created, they are the same.

 

The rule 14 that is not the same as the existing ones becomes dark. If you do the same, it will be grayed out (light), as is the router's default.

 

Look at the images

 

  0  
  0  
#4
Options
Re:Possible bug?
2023-12-01 03:10:38 - last edited 2023-12-01 03:11:27

Hi @Fausto879 

Thanks for posting in our business forum.

Fausto879 wrote

  @Clive_A 

 

There is nothing using this rule, even if it existed it would have a darker color, notice that it is grayed out, this means that the router recognizes it as a default rule for the equipment.

 

If you can, do the test, create a new rule equal to any one on the list, you will not receive notice of the existence of this rule and it will be grayed out, with this lighter color.

 

See that there is rule number 6 Dns and number 13 UDP_BLOCK I created, they are the same.

 

The rule 14 that is not the same as the existing ones becomes dark. If you do the same, it will be grayed out (light), as is the router's default.

 

Look at the images

 

 

 

On a different model, with the alpha test firmware, I did not have this issue. Same SRC and DST port.

Did you apply this service type before you noticed it is a duplicate? Try to reboot your router as well.

 

Have you tried a different browser to rule out the cache issue?

Best Regards! If you are new to the forum, please read: Howto - A Guide to Use Forum Effectively. Read Before You Post. Look for a model? Search your model NOW Official and Beta firmware. NEW features! Subscribe for the latest update!Download Beta Here☚ ☛ ★ Configuration Guide ★ ☚ ☛ ★ Knowledge Base ★ ☚ ☛ ★ Troubleshooting ★ ☚ ● Be kind and nice. ● Stay on the topic. ● Post details. ● Search first. ● Please don't take it for granted. ● No email confidentiality should be violated. ● S/N, MAC, and your true public IP should be mosaiced.
  0  
  0  
#5
Options
Re:Possible bug?
2023-12-01 03:43:09 - last edited 2023-12-01 03:43:33

Did you apply this service type before you noticed it is a duplicate? Yes.

 

Try to reboot your router as well? Yes, restated.

 

Have you tried a different browser to rule out the cache issue? Yes.

 

I updated the firmware to 2.2.2 Build 20231017 Rel.68869

I created the same rules and the problem did not repeat itself.

 

The problematic rule remains after the update, as it came with a backup of the previous version. I will do a factory reset and test

 

 

 

 

 

  0  
  0  
#6
Options
Re:Possible bug?
2023-12-01 08:28:08 - last edited 2023-12-01 14:49:52

Hi @Fausto879 

Thanks for posting in our business forum.

Fausto879 wrote

Did you apply this service type before you noticed it is a duplicate? Yes.

 

Try to reboot your router as well? Yes, restated.

 

Have you tried a different browser to rule out the cache issue? Yes.

 

I updated the firmware to 2.2.2 Build 20231017 Rel.68869

I created the same rules and the problem did not repeat itself.

 

The problematic rule remains after the update, as it came with a backup of the previous version. I will do a factory reset and test

 

 

 

 

 

 

So, I'd recommend you do this. Don't use the old backup as it is already corrupted as far as I can tell. Reset and use the V2.2.2 and start a fresh start. Then create this DNS again UDP 53 and check if this issue can be reproduced.

Best Regards! If you are new to the forum, please read: Howto - A Guide to Use Forum Effectively. Read Before You Post. Look for a model? Search your model NOW Official and Beta firmware. NEW features! Subscribe for the latest update!Download Beta Here☚ ☛ ★ Configuration Guide ★ ☚ ☛ ★ Knowledge Base ★ ☚ ☛ ★ Troubleshooting ★ ☚ ● Be kind and nice. ● Stay on the topic. ● Post details. ● Search first. ● Please don't take it for granted. ● No email confidentiality should be violated. ● S/N, MAC, and your true public IP should be mosaiced.
  0  
  0  
#7
Options
Re:Possible bug?-Solution
2023-12-01 14:36:35 - last edited 2023-12-01 14:48:22

  @Clive_A 

 

Problem fixed

 

Hardware Version: ER605 v2.0 firmware 2.2.2 Build 20231017 Rel.68869

 

I created the same rules again and the same problem didn't happen

 

Hardware Version: ER605 v2.0 firmware 2.2.2 Build 20231017 Rel.68869 

 

Enable https and then update as stated in this topic https://community.tp-link.com/en/business/forum/topic/634316

Recommended Solution
  1  
  1  
#8
Options