I am trying to configure a remote agent to use 53/UDP. My current configuration is: http://host:7465/?PacketType=UDP&UDPPort=53 but it is using UDP port 33435.
What is the correct parameter and where do I find a list of all parameters?

The current remote agent's UDP is limited to unix-style, and can't be port-targeted like the 3.30 Standard / Pro local UDP can do. You can target port 53/TCP, but not 53/UDP.

Is there any plans to address this? The unix-style UPD test uses a range of ports. I ran a quick test and 13 requests used 33434 but one request used 33435 and the other used 33436. I don't know how many ports I would need to open but, between my security team and our vendor's, it will be impossible to open that range of ports. ICMP has priority/limiting issues and TCP SYN packets are not practical(special firewall processing). I really need large UDP buffers for some of the tests.

Can you also provide the agent options as I requested?

UDP is a lot more complex than the other types because we're moving "up" one level in the network chain. With TCP, we're using part of the underlying protocol to elicit replies (the TCP SYN/ACK sequence). With UDP, this doesn't exist - instead, we have to rely on the server on the other end to send back a reply of some kind. In your case, you're asking about port 53, which is DNS. What size of DNS packet is valid to send to your server and expect a reply back? How large of a packet is a valid packet? (I use that question because you're asking about large UDP buffers).

We've not put this in the agent at this point just because of the configuration issues involved with sending all the appropriate information to the agent. In PingPlotter, we have packet format files that describe what we will send and what to expect back from the server we're polling. These format files can be user-defined, or they can be configured in PingPlotter. Passing all this information to the remote agent starts to get pretty hard to configure, and we start to get a smaller and smaller set of users that can figure it out and that will benefit.

That's not saying it's impossible to do, just explaining some of the reasons why it's not there yet. In particular, if you just want a "port unreachable" reply back, it gets easier (if you're going to a server that will send back a "port unreachable" reply when you send to an invalid port - this is what unix-style traceroute relies on).

Have you tried using a regular instance of PingPlotter to do this test (rather than using the remote agent)? Are you entirely certain that your network would even allow this type of request (UDP port 53, large packet)? Please install PingPlotter Standard or Pro on your remote agent machine and do some adhoc testing of ports/sizes/parameters to make sure that you're getting the results you want using the UDP packets in PingPlotter. If so, we'll see if we can come up with a solution for getting the remote agent to work.

The URL parameters for the agent aren't going to be "too" helpful for your goal. Here they are, though:

User-controlled parameters:

"PacketType" - possible values "UDP", "TCP", "ExternalCom", "ICMP", "ICMPRaw", "Default".

"TCPPort" - for TCP packet type only, what port should be used.

The following values are sent from PingPlotter automatically based on parameters set:

"IP" - the IP address to target.

"UniqueID" - internal use only. Used for matching and troubleshooting purposes.

"TimeoutTime" - how long to wait for a reply in Milliseconds.

"ThreadHitDelay" - how long to wait between packets.

"PacketSize" - how many bytes in the packet.

"ToSByte" - The value to fill into the ToS/DHCP field of the outgoing packets.

"StartingHop" - What's the first hop we should query?

I have been testing with PRO on both ends and trying to convert the remote end to Agent. As you said, all I need in response is "port unreachable". I used 53/UDP because it was one of your standard configs. I was able to override your packet size by using the custom setting. I just need to use a single user-defined UDP port instead of a range of UDP ports to make my firewall team happy. I can change off of 53/UDP if I have to but it will require more change control/reviews.

Can you explain PacketType=ExternalCom? All the other parameters make perfect sense.

The agent needs some additional features, but nothing too rough. We're not going to get a chance to do anything with this before next week, but I'll see if we can schedule a couple of hours to add this feature to the agent for you. If you've not heard back by the end of next week (the 10th of January), please check in (support@pingplotter.com is probably the best way).

The ExternalCom is an internal testing piece and I don't think it's going to be much use to you...