Linux alternative port numbers

Hello everyone!

Ive an IC9700 currently attached to network using its own internal server and presently RS-BA1 on default ports. 5001,2,3

I also have an IC7300 i want to put in same network for external use using wfview on a rpi locally and wfview on my laptop externally. I manually changed port number s in wfmain.cpp to 50011,12,13. Rebuilt and all good, also opened ports on firewall and router and even better.

My question is in receiver setup (addrss and user id) does the program know to use consecutive port numbers (i cant follow program that well) so would it jnow to default to using X, then X+1 and X+2?


I’m not sure why you edited the source code to change the port numbers. This is easily configured as a setting using the GUI and/or the settings file.

In any case, the control port’s protocol will tell the client what the other two ports are. This is one reason why you should not remap the ports to other numbers as they traverse any firewalls.

Ah! My apologies.

I did try changing the control port 50001 to 50011 as a secondary device (because the 9700 occupies 50001,2,3) but sidnt seem to work - must have been some other issue. I just guessed the control port didnt necessarily influence the other ports (ci-v & audio).

I had another thought too. We (Stockport Radio Society, a not for profit radio club in the UK - are plannjng to share an IC7610 to club members and the wfview looks a far nicer solution than RS-BA1.

I was inclinded to use wfview as a server rather than the rigs own server facility, but wondered about licensing? Are we pemitted to do so as a not-for-profit user wfview for the benefit of radio club members? We’d very happily give credit for the facility!

Hi Meeka,

I am interested in doing the same at our club’s IC-7300 when we move to our own premises. I hadn’t considered it may be in violation of the Wfview licence terms. I would be interested to hear how you get on.

I was more considering how we restrict operation according to the member’s own licence level.

BTW in my own station I have been running a 7300 and a 705 successfully with their own sets of port numbers. Admittedly a couple of glitches on the way. I ran into the port mapping problem, and had a clash on port 50001 with a screen-sharing app.

73 Phil GM3ZZA

Hi Phil,
regarding the licensing problem, how do you manage it during onsite operation? Is someone with a restricted lincense not allowed to use the station without a full licensed supervisor? Or do you trust them? If you trust, why is that then a problenm with reomte access?

Anyway, for other reasons I have set up a “control-script” for the IC7300. It does several useful things, i.e. reduce the max. power below 50w if you start WSJT-X or switch the antennas according to the selected frequency and more.

As I had the problem, that the remote station is used by several OMs and that it is better to run FLDigi & WSJT-X locally, I had set up the raspberry as a multi-user raspberry. So everbody has to log on with his on ID and has its own configuration or FLDigi, WSJT-X and for Wfview.
All applications are only installed once.

In this setup it would be possible, to apply certain rules to the IC7300 controller, according to licensing issues.

vy 73 de Thomas, DL3EL

Hi Meeko,

I think that’s a great idea — pool your resources and then share the radio. The license of wfview does not place any encumbrances upon such usage.

Really the only rule under the GNU/GPL v3 is that you must distribute the source code with the program. In modern times this has been extended to include links to source code, and there is a link to the source code in our About box. So, as long as you haven’t modified the program, you’re good to go. Enjoy it!

Re: WSJT-X and so on, our website includes directions on how to operate these programs through wfview, which is really nice for remote operations. Sharing a remote screen has never felt like a good solution to me. But I understand that some may find setting up virtual audio devices a bit daunting. Probably worth it though in the long run!


de W6EL

Hi Thomas,

Under our licence conditions the club callsign can only be used by a foundation or intermediate licensee under the supervision of a full licensee who has the permission of the holder of the club licence. That supervision may just be the full licensee being in the same room. They may use the equipment with their own callsign as long as they respect their power and frequency restrictions.

An unlicensed person may operate the club callsign under close supervision of the full licensee.

Vln 73 Phil GM3ZZA

Hi Elliot,
re virtual audio: I know. However, I tend to be in “the field” (camper van) as a remote user and my experience is, that digimodes or cw works better, when it is done locally at the remote end, when you have poor network coverage in the field.

Plus, I normally use an Android Tablet as a front end, which gives me no other choice.

vy 73 de Thomas, DL3EL

Why inclined to have wfview as server instead of the 7610? (or the rig’s server facility)

  1. I like the wfview interface and one-stop program rather than two-step process with icoms software
  2. its available on multiple platforms
  3. its free

That doesn’t really answer the question.

The IC7610 comes with a built-in server that under most circumstances will perform better than the server provided by wfview (the Opus codec that is possible with wfview-wfview is the only notable exception).

Added to that, Serial USB communications are much slower than the radios built-in server. This is particularly noticeable with the waterfall, which will be significantly slower when the radio is connected via USB.


BUT. Im still having trouble with the 2nd rig.

Ive reconfigured everything so I have:

IC7300 → usb → rpi with wfview (50001, 50002, 50003) @ → router


IC9700 → internal server (50011, 50012, 50013) @ → router

domain name points to router with ports exposed (both tcp and udp)

client laptop with wfview (configured as 50001) works
client laptop with wfview (configured as domainname,com 50011) doesnt
client laptop with wfview (configured as 50011) doesnt

well actually i get a connection and audio but no spectrum or waterfall. tuning control functions etc.

Am i doing something wrong???

Most likely the inbound NAT mapping on your router.

You must already have UDP ports 50001-50003 mapped to as that works, so you need to double-check that you have UDP ports 50011-50013 mapped to No need to expose TCP, wfview ONLY uses UDP.

It may also help to post some screenshots of the various wfview conflguration pages.


If you have the capability, make sure you can connect to the IC9700 on the local network. Don’t forget that the IC9700 must be rebooted once ports are changed.

Just saw that you ‘do’ get a connection (sorry missed that bit). Double check that you changed all 3 ports on the IC9700 and not just the ‘control’ port.

Its just a tad more complicated as my ISP uses CGnat so my ports are not accessible, however I work around that (for apache etc) with

domainname → vps running wireguard (tunneling data) → internet → router → firewall box running wireguard (unpacking and iptables -NAT) → destination device

Actually thinking of it, it still doesnt fully function when locally addressed either. So its not the routing externally.

If i use laptop with wfview ( at ports 50011, 50012, 50013 → hub → ic9700 ( at ports 50011, 50012, 50013 it still doesnt display spectrum or waterfall

That is almost certainly a configuration issue with the IC9700 as numerous people use a very similar setup successfully. Check all 3 ports are correct on the radio (and reboot it). Also make sure the scope is being displayed on the radio itself (it doesn’t send scope data otherwise)

AH… thats a good point!!! I’ll check.

you were quite right!!!
the rs-ba1 had turned off the bandscope and i hadnt noticed.
thank you so much! both rigs now available online.