Make local port range configurable

[KrisJanssen]

Remote - SSH extension selects a random free port on local host to set up the SSH tunnel in the function 'createTunnel()':

findAnyFreePort() cannot be limited in the range of port it tries.

This causes problems when using the functionality in our organization where client machines run Palo Alto Terminal Services Agent, which reserves ports in the range 20000-39999: Remote - SSH does not pick up on the fact that these ports are reserved (even if not used) and subsequently, the tunnel cannot be established if the extension selects a port in this range.

I validated that this is truly the cause by doing two things:

Patch randomPort() to select ports in the range 50000 to 60000:

Replace calls to findAnyFreePort() with calls to randomPort():

Doing this restores functionality.

As such I would like to request the local port range to be made a configurable item: this would allow our users to select ranges not reserved for other uses.

[eleanorjboyd]

Hello! Have you looked into the setting Remote.SSH: Server Pick Ports From Range?

[KrisJanssen]

Hello! Have you looked into the setting Remote.SSH: Server Pick Ports From Range?

That will not work I'm afraid: I am talking about the local port that is used to set up the tunnel. If you check the plugin code you see that the choice of this port is entirely random.

This is further reflected by the documentation of the cited setting:

remote.SSH.serverPickPortsFromRange reflects on the ports the remote vscode-server chooses.

Does that clarify?

[eleanorjboyd]

Yes apologies I miss-read your message. We can put this in the backlog as a feature request!

[vscodenpa]

This feature request is now a candidate for our backlog. The community has 60 days to upvote the issue. If it receives 10 upvotes we will move it to our backlog. If not, we will close it. To learn more about how we handle feature requests, please see our documentation.

Happy Coding!

[saskerg]

would be great to see this implemented!

[Idlebrand]

I'd like to see this implemented.

[dantchapman]

Having control of both server and client ports would be a great addition for highly controlled environments

[heyloan]

it would be a great addition !

[SarahArchibald]

This would be useful

[JudiNeuss]

I'd like this to be implemented

[GBianca]

It would be great to see this implemented

[vscodenpa]

🙂 This feature request received a sufficient number of community upvotes and we moved it to our backlog. To learn more about how we handle feature requests, please see our documentation.

Happy Coding!

[tonybart1337]

this has been a nightmare for me. running docker, syncthing, nvidia apps, all of those allocate enough ports that it takes me 3-5 attempts on average just to connect to my server which is very annoying.

For those wondering which App allocated a port on Windows: Win + X -> Terminal run as admin

netstat -b

Also when you open a new window, it makes a new connection, 3-5 attempts, you select a folder and then a new connection again...even though the multiplexing is on.

I would really appreciate if this can be made configurable: array of ports, array of ranges

[KrisJanssen]

@eleanorjboyd : Things are likely busy for sure but any chance there is some info on the position in backlog for this request? It is still a showstopper for us in some scenarios. Thx!

[eleanorjboyd]

@KrisJanssen currently no update on timeline sorry! When it does get added to our plan it will be linked to another issue called "iteration plan" for the month it will be addressed. Thanks

[tonybart1337]

@eleanorjboyd
after the latest VSCode update (1.77.3) and extension (v0.100.0), I no longer experience any issues! it always connects on first try!

I don't know if anyone put a word there, but thank you guys very much.

I think it was resolved in v0.100.0 Remote - SSH extension

[eleanorjboyd]

@tonybart1337, interesting to hear that it is working since I don't think we made changes that would impact local port range configurability. Are other people seeing this? @roblourens could you investigate a bit further? Thanks!

[KrisJanssen]

@eleanorjboyd @roblourens : wanted to check in where we are on this one. This remains a major showstopper which seems like a nobrainer to fix….

[KrisJanssen]

@eleanorjboyd @roblourens : Where are we on this one? It has been on the backlog for a while and we find ourselves having to deploy manually patched versions of the plugin at each update of VSCode/the plugin, which is somewhat of a pain :)

[evanasse]

I'm in the same situation as KrisJanssen and would also like to avoid to manually patch the extension.
tonybart1337's problem doesn't seem related to the original issue and I'm worried the comment of the issue being solved could have reduced priority on this.

[KrisJanssen]

@eleanorjboyd @roblourens : can you please comment.... the stale branches and lack of commits do not bode well for what otherwise seems like quite the core functionality.

[roblourens]

The extension is not open source, so you can't see what commits go in. Would like to do this but we don't have the time right now, unfortunately.

[joshspicer]

A new setting Preferred Local Port Range is now available in the pre-release build of the extension. Please let me know if you have any feedback on the feature