Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[FurryNutz]

On the 655 Rev B. Both TCP and UDP were are set for Endpoint Independent. Someone found this setting years ago on the DGL-4500 and we've kept that setting on the older UI since.

Furry,

For the DIR-655, Which h/w and f/w version used to test?

If you look at the NAT endpoint filtering via Firewall settings. Which settings achieved a "Open NAT" on the dashboard and in-game?
http://support.dlink.com/emulators/dir655/133NA/Advanced.html#Firewall

[FurryNutz]

Ok, nothing in QoS, SPI, DNS and uPnP disabled.
Configured the following in Port Forwarding on the router for 1 xbox:

Open NAT on dash board, Moderate NAT on BO3.
Hard powered off the xbox and rebooted the router to be sure. Still Moderate NAT in game.

[BIPOLAR BEAR]

        Cable connection-120+/10+, SB6183 Modem, D-Link 890L router                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       After much prodding from a good friend FurryNutz, I am posting findings with the DIR 890L. I was out of state working for 7 months and didn't have the router with me. Upon returning home and trying to play some Xbox with my gf. I found that the router Qos was seeing my smartphone, make and manufacturer, my laptop both make and manufacturer under WAN. Since it does not have an Ethernet port I am forced to use a USB/Ethernet adapter for download my FW updates. It sees the adapter but also recognizes the Laptop.
   When I noticed this the current FW was 1.10. So upon contacting said friend we (along with DLINK) we decided to downgrade the FW to 1.08, then 1.09, with different but basically the same results, XBOX unknown application, unknown vendor, Seeing the smart phone but not always the manufacturer, Laptop WAN as a Desktop, the list goes on.
   After each download I carefully and meticulously went through the update steps, to the point that I downgraded my cat6 gigabyte cable on both Xboxes to a cat6, then eventually to a cat5e. Eliminating this as a problem. I went further after a factory reset and unplugged the external hard drives on each device to eliminate this as a possible misread issue by the router when it was determining the make, manufacturer, and intended use for this device by the router Qos.
   With each factory reset the desired performance failed to be achieved by the router when reserving DHCP, it was unable to see any of listed devices by their make intended use. Besides the smartphone (it was always seen as a smart phone) the other devices were misread. My laptop was one time a gaming pc, unknown make and manufacturer. The Xboxes were both repeated as unknown.
   So upon downloading the FW v1.11 BO3. with the cat6 gigabyte cable and the external HD connected to the Xboxes, it shows XB1 as a gaming console with unknown manufacturer, the other XB2 is shown as an Xbox one, but listed as a windows phone, smartphone. This was done with Qos set as manage by devices. (once the device is turned off and it is done resonating on the router DHCP the devices seem to go to unknown again) Until powering them back on and the router will see them. Although it appears to still see the connecting cable for the LAN on my pc and identifies it, along with the smartphone.
   I set both Xboxes to power saving mode, left Qos to manage by application, left my manually input upstream, and downstream speeds, left upnp on, as well as DNS relay. Upon powering both Xboxes on they both had open NAT.
   Since under connected devices it shows unknown on both Xboxes, without Qos set to manage by device I cannot tell how it sees Xbox1. However I feel it's seen as a gaming console, Xbox2 more than likely a windows smart phone, My Laptop LAN is still shown as unknown vendor and type. It does still see my smartphone correctly by make, manufacturer, and application. After all it is the most important device on my network...HAHAHAHAHAHA!
   I believe that further testing is needed. I have doubts that if the router does not see the devices in full how can it know how to allocate traffic. I will give this a try and will see how well it handles the mild traffic on this network.
 

[FurryNutz]

Nice to see you back Sir.
"I set both Xboxes to power saving mode, left Qos to manage by application, left my manually input upstream, and downstream speeds, left upnp on, as well as DNS relay. Upon powering both Xboxes on they both had open NAT. " Was this on dashboard and in game?
What games you loading on both consoles?
Where did you place if anything, i.e. GAMING application in the priority section? I currently have GAMING in the HIGHEST section.

This is one thing I haven't tested, DNS Relay. Mines been disabled. I'll follow up with this test soon.

        Cable connection-120+/10+, SB6183 Modem, D-Link 890L router                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       After much prodding from a good friend FurryNutz, I am posting findings with the DIR 890L. I was out of state working for 7 months and didn't have the router with me. Upon returning home and trying to play some Xbox with my gf. I found that the router Qos was seeing my smartphone, make and manufacturer, my laptop both make and manufacturer under WAN. Since it does not have an Ethernet port I am forced to use a USB/Ethernet adapter for download my FW updates. It sees the adapter but also recognizes the Laptop.
   When I noticed this the current FW was 1.10. So upon contacting said friend we (along with DLINK) we decided to downgrade the FW to 1.08, then 1.09, with different but basically the same results, XBOX unknown application, unknown vendor, Seeing the smart phone but not always the manufacturer, Laptop WAN as a Desktop, the list goes on.
   After each download I carefully and meticulously went through the update steps, to the point that I downgraded my cat6 gigabyte cable on both Xboxes to a cat6, then eventually to a cat5e. Eliminating this as a problem. I went further after a factory reset and unplugged the external hard drives on each device to eliminate this as a possible misread issue by the router when it was determining the make, manufacturer, and intended use for this device by the router Qos.
   With each factory reset the desired performance failed to be achieved by the router when reserving DHCP, it was unable to see any of listed devices by their make intended use. Besides the smartphone (it was always seen as a smart phone) the other devices were misread. My laptop was one time a gaming pc, unknown make and manufacturer. The Xboxes were both repeated as unknown.
   So upon downloading the FW v1.11 BO3. with the cat6 gigabyte cable and the external HD connected to the Xboxes, it shows XB1 as a gaming console with unknown manufacturer, the other XB2 is shown as an Xbox one, but listed as a windows phone, smartphone. This was done with Qos set as manage by devices. (once the device is turned off and it is done resonating on the router DHCP the devices seem to go to unknown again) Until powering them back on and the router will see them. Although it appears to still see the connecting cable for the LAN on my pc and identifies it, along with the smartphone.
   I set both Xboxes to power saving mode, left Qos to manage by application, left my manually input upstream, and downstream speeds, left upnp on, as well as DNS relay. Upon powering both Xboxes on they both had open NAT.
   Since under connected devices it shows unknown on both Xboxes, without Qos set to manage by device I cannot tell how it sees Xbox1. However I feel it's seen as a gaming console, Xbox2 more than likely a windows smart phone, My Laptop LAN is still shown as unknown vendor and type. It does still see my smartphone correctly by make, manufacturer, and application. After all it is the most important device on my network...HAHAHAHAHAHA!
   I believe that further testing is needed. I have doubts that if the router does not see the devices in full how can it know how to allocate traffic. I will give this a try and will see how well it handles the mild traffic on this network.

[FurryNutz]

Tried with QoS enabled for Application, GAMING in Highest section and DNS relay ENABLED. 1st console had OPEN NAT across the board, 2nd console got OPEN NAT on dashboard and Moderate NAT in game (BO3 and BO2).

I hard powered off both xboxes and rebooted the router. This time I powered on the 2nd xbox and BO2 still showed Moderate NAT while the 1st xbox that was powered on 2nd showed OPEN NAT across the board.

I'm going to remove the 890L and put on my DGL-4500 Rev A2 with v1.23 loaded on it. 

[FurryNutz]

So before I put the 4500 online yesterday, I was talking to Bear more and I got more information that he neglected to include in his post. 

He told me that he manually inputs DNS addresses into each xbox console. Leaving all other addresses auto assigned by the router.
He said he's using some DNS on his xbox and Google DNS on the 2nd xbox with QoS enabled using Application mode with GAMING in Highest section and DNS Relay enabled and no Port Forwarding and uPnP enable.

So I figured lets try this on the 890L.
I manually input my ISPs DNS on mine and used 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 on the 2nd console. Saved settings and hard powered off both consoles and rebooted the router.

I still had BO2 in both consoles so I fired up my xbox with BO2. OPEN NAT across the board. I also noticed that I could actually get into the lobby this time as before I made this DNS change, upon selecting A, the game would stall and sit there and eventually gave me a server not connecting error message. I noticed that as in the upper right hand corner of the screen there is a serial number versioning displayed here for most CoD games. BO2 was showing 44.-01 before I made the manual DNS change. Now after I changed the DNS, now I get 44.#.#.## displayed and I was able to get into the gaming lobby.

I fired up the 2nd xbox and check dash board and in game. WOW, both OPEN NAT. Woo Hoo. 

Hard powered off both consoles after removing BO2 disk.
Powered on my xbox and loaded the BO3 disk. OPEN NAT across the board.
Powered on the 2nd xbox, OPEN NAT on the dashboard and Moderate NAT in BO3.  Dang.
Exited from BO3 game to the dashboard then reloaded the game. Still Moderate NAT. Hmmm

I had to stop testing as I had a evening event to attend.
Seems like we are getting a bit closer in some of this. Possible that there are some differences in how BO2 and BO3 are behaving with this router and these settings. Might be that BO3 is either more critical on his networking and processing behavior than BO2 is. I have BO1 for both consoles and will check on it.

Even though I'm hoping that we can get more similar set up configuration process experiences more like the DIR-655 and DGL-4500, with out the need to do any configurations on the consoles and just using QoS and uPnP should be enough to get OPEN NAT across the board for two or more consoles. We hope.

I still plan to re-test the DGL-4500 or the DIR-655 again today I hope.

[Gattsu]

It seems the Xbox is not very consistent when detecting used or open ports. I've been visiting different forums, regarding this same issue.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=142546231&postcount=118
This thread shows the debug logs, after a reboot or standby mode. It grabs a 3074 port but removes the mapping after it goes to sleep. Then when it wakes up it does not even request the port back.

https://miniupnp.tuxfamily.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1707
This thread talks about the Xbox1 trying to steal port 3074 from another Xbox1. Basically, communication between the UPnP server and client is buggy. the Xbox's UPnP will get lost when the port it wants is used. Users were able to modify or code their own UPnP server just so it will work. It is a mess.

Microsoft should be able to replicate this issue very easily and implement a better UPnP client that will work with a lot of router manufactures. I've heard that 2 or more Xbox consoles were never really tested in the same LAN network by Microsoft.

This inconsistency is making it very difficult to determine the root cause.

[FurryNutz]

Yes some of those issues are with Instant ON enabled that allows Sleep mode. ALL of my testing including Bears is with Instant ON disabled.

I presume that MS, Sony and other router Mfrs have not fully tested more than one consoles. I feel that I've been the only one to take on this task along with others that I know have 2 or more game consoles. I'd like to see D-Link delve into this with me while I have the resources under one house. LOL. I think MS/Sony would be somewhat interested in this as well as more and more now days, one house hold has more then one game console. Also there maybe additional underlying issues with particular games as well. Even with static DNS set last nite on both XBoxes, BO2 would be OPEN NAT across the board while BO3 was Moderate NAT on the 2nd xbox using same configuration. 

So I took the 890L off line a bit ago and installed D-Links greatest gaming router ever. 
I configured QoS as seen here:
DGL-4500 Gaming and Gamefuel for XBL
Reservations for each console with uPnP enabled and no PF or Gaming Application rules set. Only QoS. Firewall set for Endpoint Independent.
Changed both static DNS back to automatic.

Both consoles are OPEN NAT across the board including in BO3. Man I love the DGL-4500. 

I'll be playing some xbox and BO3 tonite and will see how it goes. Since the 4500s QoS uplink is capped at 2 or 3 Mb, I'm seeing that QoS isn't estimating my ISP speed as I'm at a 3Mb spec. This is ok. Will see how it goes anyways. OPEN NAT ALL THE WAY on the DGL-4500. 

[Gattsu]

Ok, I got more information regarding the difference between DIR-655 and DIR-880L, in terms of UPnP type.

If you have not noticed the DIR-655 has "NAT Endpoint filtering" option, this can change the way how UPnP will behave and selecting "endpoint Independent" equates a "full cone" NAT or in Xbox's term "Open NAT"

Unfortunately, the "next generation" of D-Link routers (DIR-880L, DIR-890L, etc)  uses a propriety UPnP implementation and programmed as a "Symmetric NAT" by default or design.

http://www.think-like-a-computer.com/2011/09/19/symmetric-nat/
The link above will describe the Xbox1's client-to-server or client-to-client negotiation process. You wouldn't want symmetric NAT because a single Xbox1 will require another port to connect to another player, simply because its IP address is different from the Xbox Live server.

[FurryNutz]

Also why the DGL-4500 works. Than you for this information.
Reminds me that others had discussed this over on smallnetbuilders forum:
https://www.snbforums.com/threads/upnp-multiple-xbox-one-gaming-consoles-nat.35324/
Someone brought up the Full Cone vs Symmetric NAT types in this discussion.

I presume that even with using any kind of Port Forwarding configurations, that we won't be able to see good OPEN NAT across the board on multiple game consoles and will continue to be problematic on these routers with Symmetric NAT type?

Is there anything that D-Link could do to add the ability for newer generation routers to include "full cone" NAT support? This would really be a good feature or have these routers be more supportive of gaming environments and multiple game consoles. I believe this information is what has been the scourge of what some of us are seeing with newer generation DIR series routers and trying to attain OPEN NAT across the board with multiple gaming consoles. Especially with more and more houses having more than just one game console. Would be nice to be able to set up multiple game consoles with out having to go thru a lot of configurations to try to get OPEN NAT across the board. I believe that last router to support multiple game consoles was the DGL-5500. I didn't get a chance to test multiples on mine. I believe that Bipolar Bear told me that when he was using his, his two xboxes were seeing open nat across the board. However that was a gaming router so I presume Full Cone NAT was being supported there. And we all know how that model went. 

Anyways, thank you for this info. Was wondering what was real going on. I felt that it had to do something with uPnP implementation and handling. Sure would be great of D-Link could add the Full Cone nat feature to there routers. I have one new generation non-D-Link router and I presume it has Full Cone NAT support as I get OPEN NAT across the board with it. Would like to see this with D-Link routers. Please. 

[Gattsu]

According to D-Link engineers, Symmetric NAT is preferred because it is the most secure.

I can only escalate a "feature request" case, which will add NAT type options just like DIR-855. However, these "requests" are only looked at if there is market demand.

More secure NAT vs Open NAT for multiple consoles.

https://www.bungie.net/en-us/Forums/Post/75409135
http://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/blog/2013/10/microsoft-the-best-xbox-one-gaming-experience-will-be-over-ipv6/

According to Microsoft, IPv6 is the future and their Xbox Live backbone seems to be IPv6 ready, since a tunneling protocol is used, "Teredo", to connect IPv4 to IPv6 via port 3074. NAT will be phased out, if that is their goal.

[FurryNutz]

AH. More info. Thank you Sir.
Sounds like we are kind of in a gray zone with some need of multiple game consoles and gaming and looking into the future of gaming with IPv6. Would like to know if MS is doing any testing with multiple game consoles/games on IPv6. I for one, on a ISP service that doesn't support IPv6 natively currently. Been wondering when they are going to. Sure are dragging there heels. 
I guess maybe one area that I have to look out for:
https://www.ipv6forum.com/ipv6_enabled/isp/approval_list.php?type=loc&content=US

Well for current time frame and current routers, I see those articles are 3-4 years old. I have seen that MS has support information for setting up the xbox for IPv6 and is fairly easy. Mostly auto detection. I presume that we would not be looking at correct configurations of ISP IPv6 support and modem/router combos and external routers to ensure IPv6 configurations are correct for gaming. I presume D-Link as well as other router mfrs will want to review that as well. Should I get native IPv6 support in the future and have multiple game consoles, I will revisit this.

Well, I know that others have moved on from using D-Link routers for this reason, they still have them but for multiple gaming applications and configurations, secure NAT or not, kind of makes things hard for those with more than one game console to enjoy gaming. A big thing with most gamers is performance and good networking conditions. OPEN NAT across the board is the golden rule and we've been hard at work trying to maintain that in current products. We've seen it on older D-Link routers and new generation routers, non D-Link. I presume that current gamers will have to keep all of this in mind and when looking at routers, will need to ask Mfrs about Full Cone and Symmetric NAT until such time that MS and IPv6 becomes the norm for gaming and we can all leave NAT behind. Until then, we don't know when that will be. And for some, like me, some ISPs haven't implemented IPv6 yet. So we are still left behind those ISPs that do have IPv6 native support. Also I presume that game Mfrs themselves will have to implement support of the IPv6 protocol as well on some level. It would be nice to know that D-Link could be supportive if someone asked if there routers were full cone NAT supporting. 
Would be nice if there was just a radio button to switch to FULL CONE NAT for multiple gaming environments in the new UI.

I believe there is a market demand however may not seem as big as we've been trying and struggling with current routers or others have found other router Mfrs to use that seem to have better support for multiple gaming consoles so the usage of D-Link routers maybe lower than whats really seen. Just talking here. This issue isn't seen with just one came console/PC. 

I guess that we will have to find whats works best for gamers until IPv6 gets fully going in the gaming realm and gamers start fully using it when MS and Game Mfrs start fully implementing it.

Thank you for your time and info. Good Stuff.

According to D-Link engineers, Symmetric NAT is preferred because it is the most secure.

I can only escalate a "feature request" case, which will add NAT type options just like DIR-855. However, these "requests" are only looked at if there is market demand.

More secure NAT vs Open NAT for multiple consoles.

https://www.bungie.net/en-us/Forums/Post/75409135
http://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/blog/2013/10/microsoft-the-best-xbox-one-gaming-experience-will-be-over-ipv6/

According to Microsoft, IPv6 is the future and their Xbox Live backbone seems to be IPv6 ready, since a tunneling protocol is used, "Teredo", to connect IPv4 to IPv6 via port 3074. NAT will be phased out, if that is their goal.

[FurryNutz]

I presume that all current D-Link and new model routers forth coming, i.e. (EXO) routers are all Symmetric NAT routers? 

Can you tell use when FULL CONE NAT stopped being implemented or supported? Which model routers were the last models? Which starting model routers were only supporting symmetric? I remember the DIR-645 seemed to support two xboxes at the time. However we had the 360s back then. I might dig out my amplify line and DIR-868L and re-test. Just curious is all.

[Gattsu]

Yes, I think its those routers with the new GUI. I think all the routers are on Symmetrical NAT by default but the old routers with the "orange" GUI has the feature to change it.

It would be nice if we can change the ports on the Xbox One. Then we can just set a port forwarding rule statically and disable NAT.

I presume that all current D-Link and new model routers forth coming, i.e. (EXO) routers are all Symmetric NAT routers? 

Can you tell use when FULL CONE NAT stopped being implemented or supported? Which model routers were the last models? Which starting model routers were only supporting symmetric? I remember the DIR-645 seemed to support two xboxes at the time. However we had the 360s back then. I might dig out my amplify line and DIR-868L and re-test. Just curious is all.

[FurryNutz]

Ok, thank you.

Ya, changing ports would be nice on the console. I was suggested to by another router user to try and set up a static IP address configuration on the 2nd xbox, then set up a PF rule configuration on the router and set the port to 3075 and see if this would help. I might try this.

Just hoping to overall to get OPEN NAT using just uPnP like with the old routers. I guess for users with two or more consoles, we'll need to find routers that support full cone nat until such time that IPv6 becomes the norm for gaming.

I contacted my ISP yesterday, they returned this:
"Thank you for contacting support. We do apologize for the inconvenience, however Cable ONE currently does not have any plan to implement IPv6. "