I’m using the SONOFF CAM Slim Gen2 and would really appreciate if you could add an option to change the RTSP port (default 554).
This feature is important for users like me who want to view the your ip cameras through third-party apps or systems, as this port 554 conflict with my other devices.
Being able to manually change the RTSP port would greatly improve compatibility and flexibility for advanced users.
Thanks in advance for considering this feature in a future firmware update!
Hello. Please tell me, could your problem be mine too? I tried to connect the same camera via rtsp to the video recorder and I can’t do anything. But at the same time I connected the old version of the camera without any problems.
Yep. I can’t use both cameras at the same time with my third-party NVR/software, as they both use the same RTSP port (554).
Other IP camera brands I use allow me to change the RTSP port, which avoids this conflict. If Sonoff could add the option to change the RTSP port in the firmware, it would solve this issue and make the cameras much more compatible with third-party systems.
Thank you. Now I understand that the problem is not in my hardware. I have already written more than once both on Facebook and here about the problem with connecting the Cam Slim 2 to the video recorder, to which I was told that they did not conduct tests for compatibility of the camera with the Dahua video recorder. Let’s hope that they will hear us.
Well, judging by the fact that it will soon be a year since they promised to watch it once and nothing has changed, we will have to wait a long time.
Hello, is it convenient for you to contact us? Contact
Regarding the problem you described, each camera has a unique IP. Even if the port is the same, we think there is no conflict. Can you describe the reason for the conflict? Please describe the usage scenario where the RTSP port number needs to be modified.
Yes, you are correct that each camera has a unique IP address and works perfectly within the local network.
However, in my case, I use third-party apps to access my cameras remotely from outside my network using a NO-IP dynamic DNS service (e.g. noip.dnsaddress.com:port). For this to work, each camera must be assigned a different external port that is forwarded from the router.
The issue with the Sonoff cameras is that they all use the same fixed RTSP port (554), which causes a conflict when trying to access more than one camera remotely through the same NO-IP address. Since I can’t change the RTSP port on the camera, I can only forward one camera at a time.
If the option to change the RTSP port was available, I could assign different ports to each camera and access them remotely without conflict.
Hope this explains the usage scenario better.
I don’t see a problem with that. Port forwarding needs to be done in the router. For example, for camera 1 1554-554, for camera 2 2554-554 and so on.
Yes, port forwarding is set from the router, but the issue is the camera doesn’t allow changing the RTSP port. I use multiple IP cameras remotely, and other brands let me change the port to avoid conflicts.
Why change the port in the camera? It stays as it is, but the external port changes.
Explanation: Why the Fixed RTSP Port 554 Does Not Inherently Cause Remote Access Conflicts
Your scenario involves accessing multiple Sonoff cameras remotely via a dynamic DNS service (e.g., noip.dnsaddress.com), with each camera requiring a unique external port on your router due to their fixed internal RTSP port (554). While this seems like a conflict, the fixed port does not prevent multi-camera access when configured correctly. Here’s why:
A unique external port (e.g., 10001, 10002) on your public IP.
To the internal IP + port 554 of each camera.
Example configuration:
text
External Port 10001 → Camera 1 (192.168.1.101:554)
External Port 10002 → Camera 2 (192.168.1.102:554)
External Port 10003 → Camera 3 (192.168.1.103:554)
No Port Conflict:
Since each camera uses a different external port, the router can distinguish between them. The fixed internal port (554) is irrelevant here—it’s the external port that ensures uniqueness.
The dynamic DNS service resolves noip.dnsaddress.com to your public IP.
The router uses the external port (e.g., 10001) to forward traffic to the correct camera’s internal IP and port 554.
Fixed Port 554 is Unaffected:
The camera only “sees” its internal port (554). The external port is stripped away by the router during forwarding.
text
External Port 554 → Camera 1 (192.168.1.101:5550)
External Port 5551 → Camera 2 (192.168.1.102:5551)
No Practical Difference:
Remote access would still require distinct URLs (e.g., :554 and :5551). The fixed port 554 doesn’t create a new limitation—it just means all cameras use the same internal port, which NAT handles seamlessly.
Thank you for the detailed explanation — it makes sense.
However, I still need help with viewing my Sonoff camera remotely using the tinyCam app and a dynamic DNS (like noip.dnsaddress.com). The camera works fine on the local network using the internal IP, but when I try to connect using the DNS address and external port, it doesn’t work.
Could you please guide me on the correct RTSP URL format or any specific settings required in tinyCam to make it work remotely through a DNS service and port forwarding?
Thanks in advance for your support.
