Print

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

[Gattsu]

Well, there are other solutions beside migrating to IPv6 or getting a router that supports Cone NAT. Microsoft can actually fix this since they know, routers in general, do not all function the same way with NAT.

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. "

 

[FurryNutz]

Ya I know. I see that routers are very different. So are the games we play.  I guess I was lucky when I got the newer generation non-Dlink router that seems to handle two consoles with OPEN NAT across the board. While one other I have doesn't, including the newer DIR series routers I have. Ya, would be nice for MS to do something. However history says with MS, they usually don't do anything. Not sure if you remember or heard about the 360 Slim wireless? Several years ago someone said that the Slim edition of the 360 would not wirelessly connect over 11Mb rates on there D-Link router. I didn't have one at the time however my friend did. I did some testing on the routers I had at the time, I found that older generation routers the 260 Slim could connect up to about 130Mb on 2.4Ghz. Then newer generation routers at the time, it would only connect at 11Mb. I passed this on to D-Link. One PM responded to me directly and said that this was a MS wireless driver issue on the Slim. MS never responded or corrected the issue on there console. 

If we can maybe come up with some ideas of what we can do with current consoles and routers with Symmetric NAT only support, would be good if we can help gamers with multiple consoles and games to work well on D-Link routers. Current ones that is.

I still believe that more and more house holds have more than one game console now days especially with children and parents who are gamers as well. There are some games that allow for splits screen operation, however there are some games that don't so this would be a contributing factor in getting another console. Split screen gaming is ok, and back in the day was what we had for single game consoles and games, however now days, I even can't game well when split screening. Especially on CoD games. It's hard to concentrate visually and audibly when your trying to focus on one portion of the screen and hear what is going on in the game near buy in your head set and having someone sit next to you and hear what there saying and not see what there doing on there side of the screen. I would buy an another console to avoid this. LOL.

So can you make contact with MS and see what they say about all this? I'd be curious if you were able to get any information from MS/XBL about this since D-Link I presume would has some contacts there. 
Would be something to ask about and see if there is any thing else we can do currently. You would think one person at MS would be interested in this. I presume we may not see any response or if MS does anything, it may not be seen in our current generation game consoles as like they do before, they would push the changes to new products and make us buy new stuff. 

Would be nice if D-Link could make there new routers more supporting in this regard as well if possible. 

My 2 cents.

[FurryNutz]

Any thoughts of uPnP 2.0?
http://www.upnp.org/specs/arch/UPnP-arch-DeviceArchitecture-v2.0.pdf

[Gattsu]

https://community.playstation.com/content/pdc/us/en_US/pdc-communities/support/PlayStation-Network-Support.topic.html/multiple_playstation-bM2X.html
Check that out, PS4 is also having this issue. PS4 responds by suggesting to use port forwarding another port or get IPv6 or purchase another public IP.

UPnP 2.0
Hmm, I think UPnP is doing its job by opening/closing ports when ever needed but Symmetrical NAT does not allow multiple IP addresses to the same already opened port. Basically, UPnP can open and close ports but NAT decides which and how many IP addresses are assigned to that port, especially inbound traffic. Full Cone NAT, allows any IP to connect to that same port, so not just the Live server but the players wanting to join.

[FurryNutz]

Wow, glad that MS isn't the only one. 

Ok, thank you for this. Helps to understand this as best as we can.

Ok, I presume at this time there maybe no real work around or configurations for multiple game consoles and working with Symmetric NAT only based routers.

I took a step back yesterday and wanted to see if the DIR-868L Rev A could work. It's the old UI however EndPoint features are hidden on this UI. Revealing the hidden features in FF with No Style pages, I found that the hidden feature was set for Port Restricted. I attempted to set EndPoint Independent to see if the actual feature was still valid. It's not. I couldn't get OPEN NAT on the 2nd console in game. I figured that the actual  feature was removed from the FW and just hidden from view in the UI.

I loaded up my DIR-857, which also the Endpoint feature is hidden, however looking at it's hidden feature in FF, It's set for Endpoint Independent. With this router I'm able to get OPEN NAT across the board and in game, BO3 on both consoles.

I was just curious on were this Endpoint feature stops responding in the various model routers I have. I have a DIR-836L that I'll try. I presume that the Amplify line and backwards campiagn models will afford some support for multiple game consoles as from what you say, they can be set for this Full Cone NAT kind of configuration which seems to work for two or more consoles.

Would be nice to have this feature option again for newer routers. I see that the DIR-882-US is set to hit soon. I've seen advertisement info about it being a good media streaming and gaming router. I suppose it would be a good gaming router for a single household console. If what you say that all new generation routers are Symmetric NAT only, it won't be good for multiple game consoles. 

I'm going to try and pick one up and demo it for a week or so while i have the gaming resources...

[FurryNutz]

And all these links to xbox and playstation information about this and the posts are years old now:
"Jan 11 2017, 6:48 PM
This post is 3 years old dosn't look like SONY cares or any console company for that matter. I have been fighting this all the way back to the original Xbox days. This has happened on Xbox, Xbox 360, Xbox 1,  PS3, and PS4. Don't think this is something that will get fixed. This has been a problem for over a decade. Sony/Microsoft just don't care otherwise they would reply to our posts with up dates. We are on our own guys....."

Sure seems like MS and Sony don't care about this issue. 

[Gattsu]

I was digging through our database, and I found a "feature request" case for "NAT endpoint filtering" back in 2014. The reason was to force "full cone NAT" but it was rejected.

Why it was rejected?
-will effect NAT performance.
-user may not use it and in today's world
-applications works perfectly under NAT
-less interoperability issue.
-more secure

[FurryNutz]

Wow, Was around the time frame we started working on this issue I believe...

I presume maybe some NAT performance could be an issue, especially on higher ISP speed tiers maybe? Currently working on the DGL-4500 and DIR-655 on a 100/3 it doesn't seem to be an issue. Maybe it could be on higher speeds, say 500Mb or greater. I presume for those on 1Gb ISPs would see issues. Depending if HW or CTF acceleration is supported and enabled. We see this mentioned on other Mfr routers and 1Gb ISP speeds. Its needed to achieve 900~Mb speeds on home routers. Not sure what D-Link does.

I think someone needs to revisit this as in todays world, there are more and more households with two or more game consoles. I know 3 house holds personally. Bipolar Bear and BiggShooter being two of them. I'm one as well. It would be nice to have some router flexability in this regard for house holds with more than one game console. Also gaming is a fair portion of the market. I would think in todays world at least. 

I've proved that not all applications work under Symmetric NAT only. Yes for single game consoles and PCs it works well. However when two or more applications, i.e. gaming are introduced, it's doesn't work well, at least with Symmetric NAT only routers. Again, only older D-Link routers can this be done and one other newer generation non-D-Link router does this work. This newer generation router supports full cone nat from what response I got from asking about it.

Less Interoperability and more secure? These don't make sense. I presume more secure refers to Symmetric NAT?

Seems that when Endpoint features were on the older routers, we didn't have must issues. We did see some connections issues however was resolved by changing from Port or Address Restricted to Endpoint which seems to help resolved these issues. Especially with gaming. Seems to add more flexibility of the router to handle certain kinds of interoperability issues with connected devices.

FYI, I've just bought a new non D-Link gaming router and currently testing it out. So far, I presume it's Symmetric Only NAT as I'm not getting OPEN NAT across the board. It's touted as there premier gaming router too. Maybe only for single gaming environments. 

Would be nice to have D-Link revisit this again and have more flexibility, even if as an option for gaming. Something to consider.
My 2 cents.

[BiggShooter]

I think it's safe to assume that most households now have at least two gaming consoles from the same manufacturer (Microsoft Xbox One / Sony PS4 Pro).  I am one of those households.  It's rather frustrating that most routers seem "locked down" when it comes to settings / management / configuration.  I've been a D'Link fan for many years, and generally D'Link routers have served my home very well  in every aspect (gaming / connected devices both wired and wireless) however, I've been forced to move to another router manufacturer as my last D'Link router (DIR-890L) simply wasn't "user" friendly for my home networking needs.  I have 30+ wired / wireless devices that are currently connected to my home network.  I want to be able to manually assign IP addresses to most of my devices.  With the 890L, I was limited to less than 20 before the router starting exhibiting issues.  I should be able to reserve as many IP addresses for devices as I want.  This is something that I'm able to do with the current router manufacturer I'm using in my home.  Having two Xbox One gaming consoles and gaming online, it was / STILL IS important that both Xbox One gaming consoles achieved / achieve OPEN NAT while online / gaming.  With the 890L, this wasn't possible.  I really hope D'Link doesn't move away from routers, but IMO, should they continue supporting past and current routers, they need to look at what is IMPORTANT for today's home networking needs.

I thought I'd chime in.  It's been a long time since I posted to the D'Link forums.  I'll keep a close *watch* on this thread.   

[BIPOLAR BEAR]

   Yes I do believe it is safe to say that most households do have more than one game console, or gaming pcs' in the network frame.
I don't post on this forum a whole lot since my issues with the DGL 4500 have been resolved. I am somewhat baffled that a router like the 890L does not have a full cone NAT.
I had the 4500 online with 5-6 game consoles. Although the DSL ISP I had to use because it was them or WIFI didn't leave me with much bandwidth, maybe .5-.7 MBPS on the up and at the peak I was seeing 6.119 MPBS down. Either way, the devices used never saw anything but an open NAT on dashboard and in game. Now gaming on the other hand was a different story. Not the routers fault! Even with the kids' friends coming over and running their consoles on the WIFI ...still open. Logging in on the Admin page and seeing all the allocated IP addresses not set up in DHCP was a nightmare. The router still handled the traffic.
Moving On!
I am baffled to see that the 890L does not support a full cone NAT. I expected to see a few glitches and FW updates after I purchased this router, but now I'm not so sure about my purchase. I bought it when we finally received a cable upgrade (it increasing is getting faster) I now have 12+MBPS up and over 120MBPS down. I was excited when I read about this router. I have been a fan of Dlink since I bought my 4500 and my DSL modem. But with todays blazing internet speeds there should have been some forethought in the development of this router. More and more cities are seeing fiber networks and the speeds are insane. Everywhere you look there are data centers being built and I have heard that it's going to last 10+ years. ISP speeds will get faster and faster. But what good does it do if the router will not handle multi-platform gaming. Maybe I should have bought a router from the local Hardware store.
   What is actually the point? Seems like PS network, XBL do not seem to concerned. The information they have posted seems to be outdated. Looking at the pages for XBL network troubleshooting is mind numbing. It's like calling and getting a Tier one tech support from your ISP, or that automated B.S. " have you checked your cable", "unplugged your modem or router?" Like I'm under 12 or over 70.
   Time for network hardware developers, XBL, PS network, to step the game up and try and keep up with ISP capabilities. Otherwise multiplayer or multi-platform gaming is out of the question. We all might as well go back to Dial-up.
   If the DGL 4500 or 5500 would handle my upload and download I'd have no problem moving it to my other service.
I know next time before I drop a $300 bill I'll read more and maybe save myself a few bucks. Read more reviews on other products that do support a full cone NAT. Just like in gaming, once they start developing another game or the next BF or COD... the don't worry about those servers so much. Moving on to newer generation of routers must be the same. If there is no concerns with fixing this issue then... we could consider multiple connections from the same ISP, I could run 2 or 3 different modems from the same location and still be under what I pay a month for the one connection I have now. Then all the gaming devices would have an open NAT without the cost of a router.
  OK, I am done now

[FurryNutz]

Thank you Shooter and Bear for your input and feed back. Great information. I hope we can help get this resolved in some way.

I took off the other day and went and got a non-D-Link router to demo for a couple of weeks. Marketed as there Premiere "Gaming Router". At $388 and tax, for this kind of router you would think it would support multiple game consoles and same game configurations. So far I can't seem to find any configuration that does and presume it's a Symmetric NAT only router. IF there is, sure isn't easy to find or configured if there is a solution. I've posted in the Mfrs support forums however I doubt I'll get any feed back. 

[FurryNutz]

Interesting development from MS: 
https://www.reddit.com/r/xboxone/comments/6si38n/psa_some_small_but_interesting_networking_changes/

Example:
https://www.snbforums.com/threads/upnp-multiple-xbox-one-gaming-consoles-nat.35324/page-20#post-340818

[FurryNutz]

Who owns this NAT Type code?
Found this recent article:
https://www.codeproject.com/Articles/1199384/NAT-traversal-for-Software-Developers?

MIT License?

Here is the RFC:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-takeda-symmetric-nat-traversal-00

[Gattsu]

Alternate multiplayer port selection - This is great news for routers with symmetrical NAT. This will allow the 2nd console to have its own port to connect to the server, separate from the first console.

Test NAT type - I knew there was something inconsistent with how the xbox1 detects NAT restrictions. No need to reboot each time to get a NAT scan going.

Some under-the-hood UPnP improvements - Awesome, this will increase NAT performance. Connect to server and other players faster.

Interesting development from MS: 
https://www.reddit.com/r/xboxone/comments/6si38n/psa_some_small_but_interesting_networking_changes/

[FurryNutz]

Hopefully and if it works, will it work well with current Symmetric NAT type? I suppose we will see.

One made a comment on SNB about maybe Symmetric NAT should be looked at and reviewed for improvements and corrections. Was said that Symmetric NAT has some problems of it self. 

We'll if MS pushes this, I hope this will make gaming on newer DIR series routers better. I'm still concerned about Symmetric NAT handling of two or more consoles with same game running. I suppose we'll have to see when that time comes. There is hope though.

I'd still like to see a small additional feature to DIR series routers to allow users to use the FULL CONE NAT method if possible. This seems to be what works well for gaming.

I found out that my one newer generation non-D-Link router is full cone nat supporting. Why this router works well with two consoles with just reserved IPs, QoS and uPnP. Unfortunately this new "gaming" router I picked up only supports Symmetric from what I'm getting.