[GH-ISSUE #4977] Is there any way to disable bindPort(default 7000)

gitea-mirror commented

2026-05-05 14:30:05 -06:00

Owner

Copy link

Originally created by @colben on GitHub (Sep 11, 2025).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/fatedier/frp/issues/4977

Describe the feature request

The udp port(quicBindPort) is just enough for me, so how to disable listening the default tcp port(7000)?

Describe alternatives you've considered

No response

Affected area

Docs
Installation
Performance and Scalability
Security
User Experience
Test and Release
Developer Infrastructure
Client Plugin
Server Plugin
Extensions
Others

Originally created by @colben on GitHub (Sep 11, 2025). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/fatedier/frp/issues/4977 ### Describe the feature request The udp port(quicBindPort) is just enough for me, so how to disable listening the default tcp port(7000)? ### Describe alternatives you've considered _No response_ ### Affected area - [ ] Docs - [ ] Installation - [ ] Performance and Scalability - [x] Security - [x] User Experience - [ ] Test and Release - [ ] Developer Infrastructure - [ ] Client Plugin - [ ] Server Plugin - [ ] Extensions - [ ] Others

gitea-mirror closed this issue

2026-05-05 14:30:06 -06:00

gitea-mirror commented

2026-05-05 14:30:07 -06:00

Author

Owner

Copy link

@laipeng668 commented on GitHub (Sep 13, 2025):

FRP requires at least one port to be set in order to start. Just switch to another port; no one will notice. Alternatively, use a firewall to directly block this port.

@laipeng668 commented on GitHub (Sep 13, 2025): FRP requires at least one port to be set in order to start. Just switch to another port; no one will notice. Alternatively, use a firewall to directly block this port.

gitea-mirror commented

2026-05-05 14:30:08 -06:00

Author

Owner

Copy link

@fatedier commented on GitHub (Sep 15, 2025):

I took a quick look at the code earlier. Since it involves port reuse, making the changes is fairly complex. By comparison, requiring it to listen on a single TCP port might not be that big of an issue?

@fatedier commented on GitHub (Sep 15, 2025): I took a quick look at the code earlier. Since it involves port reuse, making the changes is fairly complex. By comparison, requiring it to listen on a single TCP port might not be that big of an issue?

No Branch/Tag specified