expose gaga node port

[b8ky]

Seems like that's the port they want, might as well expose it as rewards are affected by it. Works on my machine. Additional firewall/port forwarding may be required, depending on setup.

[XternA]

Could you kindly provide more details that this is the port that is required by GaGaNode? I don't see anywhere in the documentation that states you must expose the following port.

Sure, on a server you may require configuring your firewall to enable ingress/egress rules to the server but shouldn't need to be for the application unless you need to explicitly have access to UI or something like that.

Merging it is not a problem but I need to consider everyone who's using it and additional changes will need to be made to the the script tool in case the ports are to be configurable.

Thanks.

[b8ky]

It's optional and affects mining rewards, it's the "port open" boolean in their web dashboard under mining -> nodes. The 36060 seems to be the default port (as seen eg https://docs.gaganode.com/running/how-to-run-gaganode-on-windows-desktop.html third pic from botton), not sure if you can change it, but guessing within-container port would have to match exposed port.

As for what it "does", it seems like it affects mining rewards when going by web ui dashboard under mining -> mining rules.

[XternA]

Appreciate the pointers. Seems this information was only shown in the Windows Desktop guide, which is why it wasn't mentioned elsewhere. Probably signifies that it's not that important.

To say that it affects mining rewards is probably false and mostly will only be related if all deployed instances are Datacenters. As long as your mining rewards is not a flat line then it's working.

I would think to interpret the ports as being to open a specific port tunnel to the server as most servers have a restricted firewall so redirecting traffic to specific inbound port makes sense. This port is apparently meaningless if the node is installed on a residential.

Anyways I opened this port myself. I will do a couple of testing with all my servers and local nodes before I approve this. I'd like to understand further how much extra it will actually have any effect.

Thanks for your patience and point this out.

[XternA]

So I've given it time to test and monitor with the ports being enabled on both local residential and on the cloud servers.

This is my conclusion:

• Opening the port explicitly doesn't increase the rewards nor does it affect when the port is closed. This is true for both residential and servers (datacenters)
• If opening the port for residential which is not required, then yes, from the UI dashboard, you will see that the flag is set to true.
• I can confirm that, exposing the ports is NOT required for servers. It will not affect earning rewards.
  • The only reason you will open a port explicitly is if you have restricted firewall to outbound internet for example in a corporate environment where only certain connections are allowed.
• If it is mandatory then the official guides would have mentioned, so it's actually misleading.
• Exposing this port is only useful if there is a dashboard built-in from the application that you can access on your localhost. This is the only reason it would make sense.

Therefore I am likely to reject this PR merge. Exposing the port to the docker container also introduces risk in general unless it has a UI dashboard that you require accessing from the browser, which isn't the case here. Alternatively since it's unnecessary it will also introduce other complexity for other users setting things up or having to mess around to configure their router firewall etc.

As long as you see your device added and visible in the UI dashboard then it's already working and able to communicate with the server.

I do appreciate your time looking into this and raising the concerns which has given me ample time to prove the experiment, but this PR is really not required.